1887

Abstract

In recent decades there has been an increase in knowledge of the distribution, species diversity and growth patterns of bacteria in human chronic infections. This has challenged standard diagnostic methods, which have undergone a development to both increase the accuracy of testing as well as to decrease the occurrence of contamination. In particular, the introduction of new technologies based on molecular techniques into the clinical diagnostic process has increased detection and identification of infectious pathogens. Sampling is the first step in the diagnostic process, making it crucial for obtaining a successful outcome. However, sampling methods have not developed at the same speed as molecular identification. The heterogeneous distribution and potentially small number of pathogenic bacterial cells in chronic infected tissue makes sampling a complicated task, and samples must be collected judiciously and handled with care. Clinical sampling is a step in the diagnostic process that may benefit from innovative methods based on current knowledge of bacteria present in chronic infections. In the present review, we describe and discuss different aspects that complicate sampling of chronic infections. The purpose is to survey representative scientific work investigating the presence and distribution of bacteria in chronic infections in relation to various clinical sampling methods.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Det Obelske Familiefond
    • Principle Award Recipient: TrineRolighed Thomsen
  • Rådet for Teknologi og Innovation (Award 09-052174)
    • Principle Award Recipient: TrineRolighed Thomsen
  • LEO Fondet (Award LF17067)
    • Principle Award Recipient: TrineRolighed Thomsen
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden
    • Principle Award Recipient: ThomasBjarnsholt
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001302
2021-01-07
2021-10-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Høiby N, Bjarnsholt T, Moser C, Bassi GL, Coenye T et al. ESCMID* guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of biofilm infections 2014. Clin Microbiol Infect 2015; 21:S1–S25 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Peters BM, Jabra-Rizk MA, O'May GA, Costerton JW, Shirtliff ME. Polymicrobial interactions: impact on pathogenesis and human disease. Clin Microbiol Rev 2012; 25:193–213 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Leitner L, Türk S, Heidinger M, Stöckl B, Posch F et al. Trends and economic impact of hip and knee arthroplasty in central Europe: findings from the Austrian national database. Sci Rep 2018; 8:4707 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. OECD Hip and knee replacement. Health at a Glance OECD Indicators; 2017
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bjarnsholt T, Alhede M, Alhede M, Eickhardt-Sørensen SR, Moser C et al. The in vivo biofilm. Trends Microbiol 2013; 21:466–474 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ravn C, Furustrand Tafin U, Bétrisey B, Overgaard S, Trampuz A. Reduced ability to detect surface-related biofilm bacteria after antibiotic exposure under in vitro conditions. Acta Orthop 2016; 87:644650 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Oliva A, Furustrand Tafin U, Maiolo EM, Jeddari S, Bétrisey B. Activities of fosfomycin and rifampin on planktonic and adherent Enterococcus faecalis strains in an experimental foreign-body infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Caliendo AM, Gilbert DN, Ginocchio CC, Hanson KE, May L et al. Better tests, better care: improved diagnostics for infectious diseases. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 57 Suppl 3:S139–S170 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Dokouhaki P, Blondeau JM. Advances in laboratory diagnostic technologies in clinical microbiology and what this means for clinical practice. Clin Pract 2012; 9:347–352 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Carbonnelle E, Mesquita C, Bille E, Day N, Dauphin B et al. MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry tools for bacterial identification in clinical microbiology laboratory. Clin Biochem 2011; 44:104–109 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Seng P, Rolain J-M, Fournier PE, La Scola B, Drancourt M et al. MALDI-TOF-mass spectrometry applications in clinical microbiology. Future Microbiol 2010; 5:1733–1754 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Motro Y, Moran-Gilad J. Next-Generation sequencing applications in clinical bacteriology. Biomol Detect Quantif 2017; 14:1–6 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Deurenberg RH, Bathoorn E, Chlebowicz MA, Couto N, Ferdous M et al. Application of next generation sequencing in clinical microbiology and infection prevention. J Biotechnol 2017; 243:16–24 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Khan ZA, Siddiqui MF, Park S. Current and emerging methods of antibiotic susceptibility testing. Diagnostics 2019; 9:E4949 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Syal K, Mo M, Yu H, Iriya R, Jing W et al. Current and emerging techniques for antibiotic susceptibility tests. Theranostics 2017; 7:1795–1805 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kirketerp-Møller K, Jensen Peter Ø, Fazli M, Madsen KG, Pedersen J et al. Distribution, organization, and ecology of bacteria in chronic wounds. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46:2717–2722 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Bjarnsholt T, Kirketerp-Møller K, Jensen Peter Østrup, Madsen KG, Phipps R et al. Why chronic wounds will not heal: a novel hypothesis. Wound Repair Regen 2008; 16:2–10 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Fazli M, Bjarnsholt T, Kirketerp-Møller K, Jørgensen B, Andersen AS et al. Nonrandom distribution of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in chronic wounds. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47:4084–4089 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Thomsen TR, Aasholm MS, Rudkjøbing VB, Saunders AM, Bjarnsholt T et al. The bacteriology of chronic venous leg ulcer examined by culture-independent molecular methods. Wound Repair Regen 2010; 18:38–49 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Bjarnsholt T. The role of bacterial biofilms in chronic infections. APMIS Suppl 20131–58 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Bay L, Kragh KN, Eickhardt SR, Poulsen SS, Gjerdrum LMR et al. Bacterial aggregates establish at the edges of acute epidermal wounds. Adv Wound Care 2018; 7:105–113 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kirketerp-Møller K, Stewart PS, Bjarnsholt T. The zone model: a conceptual model for understanding the microenvironment of chronic wound infection. Wound Repair Regen
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Alhede M, Lorenz M, Fritz BG, Jensen Peter Østrup, Ring HC et al. Bacterial aggregate size determines phagocytosis efficiency of polymorphonuclear leukocytes. Med Microbiol Immunol 2020; 209:669–680 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Jensen LK, Koch J, Dich-Jorgensen K, Aalbaek B, Petersen A et al. Novel porcine model of implant-associated osteomyelitis: a comprehensive analysis of local, regional, and systemic response. J Orthop Res 2017; 35:2211–2221 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Jensen LK, Koch J, Aalbaek B, Moodley A, Bjarnsholt T et al. Early implant-associated osteomyelitis results in a peri-implanted bacterial reservoir. APMIS 2017; 125:38–45 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Xu Y, Rudkjøbing VB, Simonsen O, Pedersen C, Lorenzen J et al. Bacterial diversity in suspected prosthetic joint infections: an exploratory study using 16S rRNA gene analysis. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2012; 65:291–304 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Larsen LH, Khalid V, Xu Y, Thomsen TR, Schønheyder HC et al. Differential contributions of specimen types, culturing, and 16S rRNA sequencing in diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections. J Clin Microbiol 2018; 56: 25 04 2018 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Labek G, Thaler M, Janda W, Agreiter M, Stöckl B. Revision rates after total joint replacement: cumulative results from worldwide joint register datasets. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93:293-7 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Purudappa PP, Sharma OP, Priyavadana S, Sambandam S, Villafuerte JA. Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) in revision hip and knee arthroplasty- a review of the literature. J Orthop 2020; 17:1–6 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Kamme C, Lindberg L. Aerobic and anaerobic bacteria in deep infections after total hip arthroplasty: differential diagnosis between infectious and non-infectious loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1981201-7[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K, Higuera C, Della Valle C. The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria. J Arthroplasty 2018
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Osmon DR, Berbari EF, Berendt AR, Lew D, Zimmerli W et al. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases Society of Americaa. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 56:e1–e25 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tande AJ, Patel R. Prosthetic joint infection. Clin Microbiol Rev 2014; 27:302–345 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Li C, Renz N, Trampuz A. Management of periprosthetic joint infection. Hip Pelvis 2018; 30:138–146 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Atkins BL, Athanasou N, Deeks JJ, Crook DWM, Simpson H et al. Prospective evaluation of criteria for microbiological diagnosis of Prosthetic-Joint infection at revision arthroplasty. J Clin Microbiol 1998; 36:2932–2939 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Mikkelsen DB, Pedersen C, Højbjerg T, Schønheyder HC. Culture of multiple peroperative biopsies and diagnosis of infected knee arthroplasties. APMIS 2006; 114:449–452 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Vergidis P, Patel R. Novel approaches to the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of medical device-associated infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2012; 26:173–186 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Holinka J, Bauer L, Hirschl AM, Graninger W, Windhager R et al. Sonication cultures of explanted components as an add-on test to routinely conducted microbiological diagnostics improve pathogen detection. J Orthop Res 2011; 29:617–622 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Vergidis P, Greenwood-Quaintance KE, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Morrey BF, Steinmann SP. Implant sonication for the diagnosis of prosthetic elbow infection. J Shoulder Elb Surg 2011
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Esteban J, Alonso-Rodriguez N, del-Prado G, Ortiz-Pérez A, Molina-Manso D et al. PCR-Hybridization after sonication improves diagnosis of implant-related infection. Acta Orthop 2012; 83:299304 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Achermann Y, Vogt M, Leunig M, Wüst J, Trampuz A. Improved diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection by multiplex PCR of sonication fluid from removed implants. J Clin Microbiol 2010; 48:12081214 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Trampuz A, Piper KE, Jacobson MJ, Hanssen AD, Unni KK et al. Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:654–663 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Drago L, Signori V, De Vecchi E, Vassena C, Palazzi E et al. Use of dithiothreitol to improve the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections. J Orthop Res 2013; 31:1694–1699 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Stoodley P, Conti SF, DeMeo PJ, Nistico L, Melton-Kreft R et al. Characterization of a mixed MRSA/MRSE biofilm in an explanted total ankle arthroplasty. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2011; 62:66–74 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Swearingen MC, DiBartola AC, Dusane D, Granger J, Stoodley P. 16S rRNA analysis provides evidence of biofilms on all components of three infected periprosthetic knees including permanent braided suture. Pathog Dis 2016; 74:ftw083 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Dibartola AC, Swearingen MC, Granger JF, Stoodley P, Dusane DH. Biofilms in orthopedic infections: a review of laboratory methods. APMIS 2017; 125:418–428 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Bisha B, Brehm-Stecher BF. Combination of adhesive-tape-based sampling and fluorescence in situ hybridization for rapid detection of Salmonella on fresh produce. J Vis Exp 20102308 18 Oct 2010 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Makary MA, Epstein J, Pronovost PJ, Millman EA, Hartmann EC et al. Surgical specimen identification errors: a new measure of quality in surgical care. Surgery 2007; 141:450–455 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Layfield LJ, Anderson GM. Specimen labeling errors in surgical pathology: an 18-month experience. Am J Clin Pathol 2010; 134:466-70 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Larsen LH, Xu Y, Simonsen O, Pedersen C, Schønheyder HC et al. ‘All in a box’ a concept for optimizing microbiological diagnostic sampling in prosthetic joint infections. BMC Res Notes 2014; 7:418 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Costerton W. Culture negative. Orthopedic Biofilm Infections 2011
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Stewart PS, Costerton JW. Antibiotic resistance of bacteria in biofilms. Lancet 2001
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Høiby N, Bjarnsholt T, Givskov M, Molin S, Ciofu O. Antibiotic resistance of bacterial biofilms. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2010; 35:322–332 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Gonzalez Moreno M, Trampuz A, Di Luca M. Synergistic antibiotic activity against planktonic and biofilm-embedded Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus pyogenes and Streptococcus oralis . J Antimicrob Chemother 2017; 72:3085-3092 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Sauget M, Valot B, Bertrand X, Hocquet D. Can MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry reasonably type bacteria?. Trends Microbiol 2017; 25:447455 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Woo PCY, Lau SKP, Teng JLL, Tse H, Yuen K-Y. Then and now: use of 16S rDNA gene sequencing for bacterial identification and discovery of novel bacteria in clinical microbiology laboratories. Clin Microbiol Infect 2008; 14:908-34 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Sontakke S, Cadenas MB, Maggi RG, Diniz PPVP, Breitschwerdt EB. Use of broad range16S rDNA PCR in clinical microbiology. J Microbiol Methods 2009; 76:217225 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Parvizi J, Erkocak OF, Della Valle CJ. Culture-Negative periprosthetic joint infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96:430436 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  59. McLawhorn AS, Nawabi DH, Ranawat AS. Management of resistant, atypical and culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections after hip and knee arthroplasty. Open Orthop J 2016; 10:615632 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Aggarwal VK, Bakhshi H, Ecker NU, Parvizi J, Gehrke T et al. Organism profile in periprosthetic joint infection: pathogens differ at two arthroplasty infection referral centers in Europe and in the United States. J Knee Surg 2014; 27:399–406 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Rampini SK, Bloemberg G V, Keller PM, Büchler AC, Dollenmaier G. Broad-range 16S rRNA gene polymerase chain reaction for diagnosis of culture-negative bacterial infections. Clin Infect Dis 2011
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Tkadlec J, Peckova M, Sramkova L, Rohn V, Jahoda D et al. The use of broad-range bacterial PCR in the diagnosis of infectious diseases: a prospective cohort study. Clin Microbiol Infect 2019; 25:747–752 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Welinder-Olsson C, Dotevall L, Hogevik H, Jungnelius R, Trollfors B et al. Comparison of broad-range bacterial PCR and culture of cerebrospinal fluid for diagnosis of community-acquired bacterial meningitis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2007; 13:879–886 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Jacquier H, Fihman V, Amarsy R, Vicaut E, Bousson V et al. Benefits of polymerase chain reaction combined with culture for the diagnosis of bone and joint infections: a prospective test performance study. Open Forum Infect Dis 2019; 6:ofz511 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Borde JP, Häcker GA, Guschl S, Serr A, Danner T et al. Diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections using UMD-Universal kit and the automated multiplex-PCR Unyvero i60 ITI® cartridge system: a pilot study. Infection 2015; 43:551560 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Qu X, Zhai Z, Li H, Li H, Liu X. PCR-based diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. J Clin Microbiol 2013
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Lippmann T, Braubach P, Ettinger M, Kuehnel M, Laenger F. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (fish) for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded surgical tissues. J Bone Jt Surg - Am Vol 2019
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Li C, Ojeda-Thies C, Trampuz A. Culture of periprosthetic tissue in blood culture bottles for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2019; 20: [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Poulakou G, Giannitsioti E, Tsiodras S. What is new in the management of skin and soft tissue infections in 2016?. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2017; 30:158–171 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  70. James GA, Swogger E, Wolcott R, Pulcini EdeLancey, Secor P et al. Biofilms in chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen 2008; 16:37–44 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Rondas AALM, Schols JMGA, Halfens RJG, Stobberingh EE. Swab versus biopsy for the diagnosis of chronic infected wounds. Adv Skin Wound Care 2013; 26:211–219 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Xu Y, Larsen LH, Lorenzen J, Hall-Stoodley L, Kikhney J. Microbiological diagnosis of device-related biofilm infections. APMIS 2017; 125:289–303 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Fournier P-E, Drancourt M, Colson P, Rolain J-M, Scola BL, La SB et al. Modern clinical microbiology: new challenges and solutions. Nat Rev Microbiol 2013; 11:574–585 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001302
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001302
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

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