A New Bacterium, <i>Lactobacillus acidophilus</i>, Causing Necrotizing Fasciitis

Hubbard, J. P.; Jariwala, Bhavik; Hill, Ashley; Gega, Arjet; Palesty, J. Alexander

doi:10.1177/000313481808400208

Cited by 6 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After analysing the full texts of the eight articles that arrived to the evaluation phase, three were not related to this TU, three were referring to articles published before the period being evaluated and had already been subjected to inspection by the working group (WG). The two papers that arrived to final step (Hubbard et al., ; Nayeem et al., ) described infections putatively ascribed to lactobacilli, although in none of them the methods used for identification of the aetiologic agents are indicated. In Hubbard et al.…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Hubbard et al. (), a female that suffered from type 2 diabetes and had diabetic ketoacidosis at admission, presented a necrotic ulcer in the left genital labium that was claimed to be produced by L. acidophilus . However, primary pathogens, such as Candida albicans , Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Klebsiella oxytoca , were also isolated upon debridement of the lesion.…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Update of the list of QPS‐recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 11: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2019

Koutsoumanis¹,

Allende²,

Álvarez‐Ordóñez³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Qualified presumption of safety (QPS) was developed to provide a generic safety evaluation for biological agents to support EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance are assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are where possible to be confirmed at strain or product level, reflected by ‘qualifications’. No new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA was updated with 54 biological agents, received between April and September 2019; 23 already had QPS status, 14 were excluded from the QPS exercise (7 filamentous fungi, 6 Escherichia coli, Sphingomonas paucimobilis which was already evaluated). Seventeen, corresponding to 16 TUs, were evaluated for possible QPS status, fourteen of these for the first time, and Protaminobacter rubrum, evaluated previously, was excluded because it is not a valid species. Eight TUs are recommended for QPS status. Lactobacillus parafarraginis and Zygosaccharomyces rouxii are recommended to be included in the QPS list. Parageobacillus thermoglucosidasius and Paenibacillus illinoisensis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification ‘for production purposes only’ and absence of toxigenic potential. Bacillus velezensis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualifications; the absence of toxigenic potential and the absence of aminoglycoside production, including the genes encoding this. Cupriavidus necator, Aurantiochytrium limacinum and Tetraselmis chuii can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification; for production purposes only. Pantoea ananatis is not recommended for the QPS list due to lack of body of knowledge in relation to its pathogenicity potential for plants. Corynebacterium stationis, Hamamotoa singularis, Rhodococcus aetherivorans and Rhodococcus ruber cannot be recommended for the QPS list due to lack of body of knowledge. Kodamaea ohmeri cannot be recommended for the QPS list due to safety concerns.

show abstract

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Update of the list of QPS‐recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 11: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2019

Koutsoumanis¹,

Allende²,

Álvarez‐Ordóñez³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Virulence Characters and Proposed Pathogenesismentioning

confidence: 94%

Lactobacilli Infection Case Reports in the Last Three Years and Safety Implications

Rossi¹,

Amadoro²,

Colavita³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

probiotics. However, these bacteria caused rare infections mostly in diabetic and immunocompromised subjects in presence of risk factors such as prosthetic hearth valves and dental procedures or caries. The scope of this survey was re-assessing the pathogenic potential of lactobacilli based on the infection case reports published in the last three years. In 2019, 2020 and 2021 17, 15 and 16 cases, respective-ly,.including endocarditis, bacteremia and other infections, were reported. These annual numbers are higher than observed previously. Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (13 cases), comprising strain GG (ATCC 53103) with established applications in healthcare, L. paracasei (7 cases), Lactobacillus acidophilus (5 cas-es), L. jensenii (5 cases), Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (3 cases), L. paraplantarum, L. delbrueckii subsp. del-brueckii, L. gasseri, L. paragasseri, Limosilactobacillus fermentum and L. reuteri (1 case each) were involved. Virulence characterization of two strains that caused infections, a derivative of L. rhamnosus GG and L.paracasei LP10266, indicated that increased biofilm forming capacity favors pathogenicity and it is determined by variable genetic traits. This survey highlighted that strains of lactobacilli able to cause infections were little characterized genet-ically. Instead, to avoid that these bacteria become a hazard, genetic stability should be periodically re-evaluated by whole genome sequencing (WGS) to ensure that only non-pathogenic variants are ad-ministered to vulnerable individuals.

show abstract

“…Therefore, the combination of increasing probiotic use [ 7 ] and the increasing trend of diabetes incidence [ 69 ] could explain the rise of lactobacilli infections. In six cases reviewed here [ 20 , 28 , 37 , 39 , 57 , 59 ] it was stated that diabetes mellitus was poorly controlled by the patient, thus indicating that a better management of this condition could reduce the probability of lactobacilli infections. For what concerns patients with immunosuppression as a population at risk of lactobacilli infections, it must be considered that also this category is on the rise for the increase in use of immunosuppressive drugs to treat cancer, organ transplants, respiratory syndromes such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dialysis, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory skin conditions, Crohn’s disease [ 70 , 71 , 72 ].…”

Section: Virulence Characters and Proposed Pathogenesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A case report not included in previous reviews but worth of being mentioned for its uniqueness and severity was published in 2018 [ 59 ] and regards fasciitis caused by L. acidophilus in a 59-year-old diabetic woman. The infection caused an abdominopelvic wound with necrotic tissue along the fascial planes.…”

Section: Aspects Of the Lactobacilli Infections Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lactobacilli Infection Case Reports in the Last Three Years and Safety Implications

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lactobacilli constitute the dominant microbiota in many fermented foods and comprise widely used probiotics. However, these bacteria cause rare infections mostly in diabetic and immunocompromised subjects in presence of risk factors such as prosthetic hearth valves and dental procedures or caries. The scope of this survey was re-assessing the pathogenic potential of lactobacilli based on the infection case reports published in the last three years. In 2019, 2020, and 2021, total of 17, 15, and 16 cases, respectively, including endocarditis, bacteremia, and other infections, were reported. These annual numbers are higher than those observed previously. Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (13 cases), comprising strain GG (ATCC 53103) with established applications in healthcare, L. paracasei (7 cases), Lactobacillus acidophilus (5 cases), L. jensenii (5 cases), Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (3 cases), L. paraplantarum, L. delbrueckii subsp. delbrueckii, L. gasseri, L. paragasseri, Limosilactobacillus fermentum, and L. reuteri (1 case each) were involved. Virulence characterization of two strains that caused infections, a derivative of L. rhamnosus GG and L. paracasei LP10266, indicated that increased biofilm-forming capacity favors pathogenicity and it is determined by variable genetic traits. This survey highlights that the strains of lactobacilli that cause infections are little characterized genetically. Instead, to avoid that these bacteria become a hazard, genetic stability should be periodically re-evaluated by whole genome sequencing (WGS) to ensure that only non-pathogenic variants are administered to vulnerable individuals.

show abstract

A New Bacterium, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Causing Necrotizing Fasciitis

Cited by 6 publications

References 4 publications

Update of the list of QPS‐recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 11: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2019

Update of the list of QPS‐recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 11: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2019

Lactobacilli Infection Case Reports in the Last Three Years and Safety Implications

Lactobacilli Infection Case Reports in the Last Three Years and Safety Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About