1887

Abstract

Purpose. While some micro-organisms, such as Staphylococcus aureus , are clearly implicated in causing tissue damage in diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), our knowledge of the contribution of the entire microbiome to clinical outcomes is limited. We profiled the microbiome of a longitudinal sample series of 28 people with diabetes and DFUs of the heel in an attempt to better characterize the relationship between healing, infection and the microbiome.

Methodology. In total, 237 samples were analysed from 28 DFUs, collected at fortnightly intervals for 6 months or until healing. Microbiome profiles were generated by 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis, supplemented by targeted nanopore sequencing.

Result/Key findings. DFUs which failed to heal during the study period (20/28, 71.4 %) were more likely to be persistently colonized with a heterogeneous community of micro-organisms including anaerobes and Enterobacteriaceae (log-likelihood ratio 9.56, P=0.008). During clinically apparent infection, a reduction in the diversity of micro-organisms in a DFU was often observed due to expansion of one or two taxa, with recovery in diversity at resolution. Modelling of the predicted species interactions in a single DFU with high diversity indicated that networks of metabolic interactions may exist that contribute to the formation of stable communities.

Conclusion. Longitudinal profiling is an essential tool for improving our understanding of the microbiology of chronic wounds, as community dynamics associated with clinical events can only be identified by examining changes over multiple time points. The development of complex communities, particularly involving Enterobacteriaceae and strict anaerobes, may be contributing to poor outcomes in DFUs and requires further investigation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000907
2019-01-09
2019-10-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Boulton AJ, Vileikyte L, Ragnarson-Tennvall G, Apelqvist J. The global burden of diabetic foot disease. Lancet 2005;366:1719–1724 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Kerr M. Diabetic footcare in England, An economic case study. Diabetes UK. 2017;www.evidence.nhs.uk/document?id=1915227&returnUrl=Search%3Fq%3DAmputation%2Bcost&q=Amputation+cost
  3. Prompers L, Schaper N, Apelqvist J, Edmonds M, Jude E et al. Prediction of outcome in individuals with diabetic foot ulcers: focus on the differences between individuals with and without peripheral arterial disease. The EURODIALE Study. Diabetologia 2008;51:747–755 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ince P, Abbas ZG, Lutale JK, Basit A, Ali SM et al. Use of the SINBAD classification system and score in comparing outcome of foot ulcer management on three continents. Diabetes Care 2008;31:964–967 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Lipsky BA, Aragón-Sánchez J, Diggle M, Embil J, Kono S et al. IWGDF guidance on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2016;32:45–74 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Mizrahi-Man O, Davenport ER, Gilad Y. Taxonomic classification of bacterial 16S rRNA genes using short sequencing reads: evaluation of effective study designs. PLoS One 2013;8:e53608 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dowd SE, Wolcott RD, Sun Y, Mckeehan T, Smith E et al. Polymicrobial nature of chronic diabetic foot ulcer biofilm infections determined using bacterial tag encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing (bTEFAP). PLoS One 2008;3:e3326 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Gardner SE, Hillis SL, Heilmann K, Segre JA, Grice EA. The neuropathic diabetic foot ulcer microbiome is associated with clinical factors. Diabetes 2013;62:923–930 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Loesche M, Gardner SE, Kalan L, Horwinski J, Zheng Q et al. Temporal Stability in Chronic Wound Microbiota Is Associated With Poor Healing. J Invest Dermatol 2017;137:237–244 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Jain M, Olsen HE, Paten B, Akeson M. The Oxford Nanopore MinION: delivery of nanopore sequencing to the genomics community. Genome Biol 2016;17:239 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Jeffcoate W, Game F, Turtle-Savage V, Musgrove A, Price P et al. Evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of lightweight fibreglass heel casts in the management of ulcers of the heel in diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Health Technol Assess 2017;21:1–92 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gilbert JA, Field D, Swift P, Thomas S, Cummings D et al. The taxonomic and functional diversity of microbes at a temperate coastal site: a 'multi-omic' study of seasonal and diel temporal variation. PLoS One 2010;5:e15545 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Salter SJ, Cox MJ, Turek EM, Calus ST, Cookson WO et al. Reagent and laboratory contamination can critically impact sequence-based microbiome analyses. BMC Biol 2014;12:87 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Korpela K. mare: Microbiota Analysis in R Easily, 1.0. R package version 1.0. Zenodo.http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.50310 2016
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Edgar RC. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nat Methods 2013;10:996–998 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cole JR, Wang Q, Fish JA, Chai B, Mcgarrell DM et al. Ribosomal Database Project: data and tools for high throughput rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 2014;42:D633–D642 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Feehery GR, Yigit E, Oyola SO, Langhorst BW, Schmidt VT et al. A method for selectively enriching microbial DNA from contaminating vertebrate host DNA. PLoS One 2013;8:e76096 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Li H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 2018;34:3094–3100 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kim D, Song L, Breitwieser FP, Salzberg SL. Centrifuge: rapid and sensitive classification of metagenomic sequences. Genome Res 2016;26:1721–1729 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Koren S, Walenz BP, Berlin K, Miller JR, Bergman NH et al. Canu: scalable and accurate long-read assembly via adaptive k-mer weighting and repeat separation. Genome Res 2017;27:722–736 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Zelezniak A, Andrejev S, Ponomarova O, Mende DR, Bork P et al. Metabolic dependencies drive species co-occurrence in diverse microbial communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2015;112:6449–6454 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Dixon P. VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. Journal of Vegetation Science 2003;14:927–930 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Levy R, Borenstein E. Metabolic modeling of species interaction in the human microbiome elucidates community-level assembly rules. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013;110:12804–12809 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Carr R, Borenstein E. NetSeed: a network-based reverse-ecology tool for calculating the metabolic interface of an organism with its environment. Bioinformatics 2012;28:734–735 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Borenstein E, Kupiec M, Feldman MW, Ruppin E. Large-scale reconstruction and phylogenetic analysis of metabolic environments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008;105:14482–14487 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Zankari E, Hasman H, Cosentino S, Vestergaard M, Rasmussen S et al. Identification of acquired antimicrobial resistance genes. J Antimicrob Chemother 2012;67:2640–2644 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Wolcott RD, Hanson JD, Rees EJ, Koenig LD, Phillips CD et al. Analysis of the chronic wound microbiota of 2,963 patients by 16S rDNA pyrosequencing. Wound Repair Regen 2016;24:163–174 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Smith K, Collier A, Townsend EM, O'Donnell LE, Bal AM et al. One step closer to understanding the role of bacteria in diabetic foot ulcers: characterising the microbiome of ulcers. BMC Microbiol 2016;16:54 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gontcharova V, Youn E, Sun Y, Wolcott RD, Dowd SE. A comparison of bacterial composition in diabetic ulcers and contralateral intact skin. Open Microbiol J 2010;4:8–19 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. David LA, Maurice CF, Carmody RN, Gootenberg DB, Button JE et al. Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome. Nature 2014;505:559–563 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Blakytny R, Jude E. The molecular biology of chronic wounds and delayed healing in diabetes. Diabet Med 2006;23:594–608 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Zykova SN, Jenssen TG, Berdal M, Olsen R, Myklebust R et al. Altered cytokine and nitric oxide secretion in vitro by macrophages from diabetic type II-like db/db mice. Diabetes 2000;49:1451–1458 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Sindrilaru A, Peters T, Wieschalka S, Baican C, Baican A et al. An unrestrained proinflammatory M1 macrophage population induced by iron impairs wound healing in humans and mice. J Clin Invest 2011;121:985–997 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Grice EA, Snitkin ES, Yockey LJ, Bermudez DM, Liechty KW et al. Longitudinal shift in diabetic wound microbiota correlates with prolonged skin defense response. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107:14799–14804 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Wolcott R, Sanford N, Gabrilska R, Oates JL, Wilkinson JE et al. Microbiota is a primary cause of pathogenesis of chronic wounds. J Wound Care 2016;25:S33–S43 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Dalton T, Dowd SE, Wolcott RD, Sun Y, Watters C et al. An in vivo polymicrobial biofilm wound infection model to study interspecies interactions. PLoS One 2011;6:e27317 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Milner P, Batten JE, Curtis MA. Development of a simple chemically defined medium for Porphyromonas gingivalis: requirement for alpha-ketoglutarate. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1996;140:125–130 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Tan Q, Wang W, Yang C, Zhang J, Sun K et al. α-ketoglutarate is associated with delayed wound healing in diabetes. Clin Endocrinol 2016;85:54–61 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Costalonga M, Herzberg MC. The oral microbiome and the immunobiology of periodontal disease and caries. Immunol Lett 2014;162:22–38 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Winter SE, Lopez CA, Bäumler AJ. The dynamics of gut-associated microbial communities during inflammation. EMBO Rep 2013;14:319–327 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Ramsey MM, Freire MO, Gabrilska RA, Rumbaugh KP, Lemon KP. Staphylococcus aureus Shifts toward Commensalism in Response to Corynebacterium Species. Front Microbiol 2016;7:1230 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Nelson A, Wright-Hughes A, Backhouse MR, Lipsky BA, Nixon J et al. CODIFI (Concordance in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Infection): a cross-sectional study of wound swab versus tissue sampling in infected diabetic foot ulcers in England. BMJ Open 2018;8:e019437 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000907
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000907
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary File 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error