Cited by 8Advanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingOdor and Emission Control Technologies

Supporting wound infection diagnosis: advancements and challenges with electronic noses

Open access
Wörner, Julius, Moelleken, Maurice, Dissemond, Joachim, Pein-Hackelbusch, Miriam·2023·Frontiers in Sensors

Abstract

Wound infections are a major problem worldwide, both for the healthcare system and for patients affected. Currently available diagnostic methods to determine the responsible germs are time-consuming and costly. Wound infections are mostly caused by various bacteria, which in turn produce volatile organic compounds. From clinical experience, we know that depending on the bacteria involved, a specific odor impression can be expected. For this reason, we hypothesized that electronic noses, i.e., non-invasive electronic sensors for the detection of volatile organic compounds, are applicable for diagnostic purposes. By providing a comprehensive overview of the state-of-research, we tested our hypothesis. In particular, we addressed three overarching questions: 1) which sensor technologies are suitable for the diagnosis of wound infections and why? 2) how must the (biological) sample be prepared and presented to the measurement system? 3) which machine learning methods and algorithms have already proven successful for the classification of microorganisms? The corresponding articles have critically been reviewed and are discussed particularly in the context of their potential for clinical diagnostics. In summary, it can already be stated today that the use of electronic noses for the detection of bacteria in wound infections is a very interesting, fast and non-invasive method. However, reliable clinical studies are still missing and further research is necessary.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fsens.2023.1250756

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 85 · Cited by 8

Authors
Wörner, J., Moelleken, M., Dissemond, J., & Pein-Hackelbusch, M.
Affiliations
University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
Venue
Frontiers in Sensors
Published
2023-09-14
Volume
4
ISSN
2673-5067 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386733737
Cited by
8
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1
FWCI
0.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Advanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Process Chemistry and Technology › Odor and Emission Control Technologies
Keywords
wound infection, electronic nose, volatile organic compounds, bacterial detection, non-invasive diagnosis, sample preparation, clinical diagnostics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review