The microbial epidemiology of breast implant infections in a regional referral centre for plastic and reconstructive surgery in the south of France

Seng, Piseth; Bayle, S.; Alliez, A.; Romain, Fanny; Casanova, Dominique; Stein, Andréas

doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2015.04.010

Cited by 72 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In our work, staphylococci constituted 50% of the isolated microorganisms. They were in a lower percentage than in the studies by Seng et al (2015) but similar to the results obtained in Song et al (2017) (respectively: 71.0%, and 50.0%). In three cases (9.4%), we isolated E. faecalis that can adhere, modify the immune response, and form biofilms (Prażmo et al 2016); however, these species are rarely the etiological agent of implant infections.…”

supporting

confidence: 90%

“…Among the etiological agents of infections, the most common are skin microbiota: coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, Corynebacterium spp., Propionibacterium acnes, and Staphylococcus aureus, but more and more frequently there are reports on the increased proportion of Gram-negative bacteria from the order Enterobacterales and anaerobic microorganisms among etiological agents of these infections (Halvorson et al 2007;Weichman et al 2013;Seng et al 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Significance of Infections in Implant Loss After Breast Reconstruction in the Course of Breast Cancer Treatment

Szymankiewicz¹,

Nowikiewicz

Biedka

2019

Polish Journal of Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study was to analyze the reasons for removing implants after breast reconstruction in the course of treatment of breast cancer. The study involved 428 patients, who underwent a total of 648 breast reconstruction procedures using artificial implants. 47 out of 648 cases (7.3%) were identified in which the implant had to be removed. Of the 47 cases, 57.4% had undergone deferred reconstruction, and 42.6% immediate reconstruction; 27.7% had undergone pre-operative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 27.7% pre-operative chemotherapy, and 2.1% pre-operative radiotherapy; 6.4% were diabetic, 4.3% active smokers, and more than 50.0% had BMI greater than 25 kg/m2. In 83.0% of the analyzed cases, the reason for removal of the implant was infection, in 8.5% it was local recurrence of breast cancer, in 4.3% it was damage (leakage) of the implant, and in 2.1% it was post-operative pain. About 87.0% of infections appeared within one year of implantation; however, less than a half developed within 90 days of the reconstructive surgery, and up to 30 days only about 13.0% had appeared. Among the etiological agents of infections were: coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (31.3%), Staphylococcus aureus (18.7%), Enterococcus faecalis (9.4%), Enterobacter cloacae (18.8%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (12.5%), Acinetobacter lwoffii (3.1%), and other Gram-negative fermenting rods accounted for 6.2%. Infections were the most common reason for removing the implant after breast reconstruction. and occurred most often as late infections (> 30 days after surgery). The time of observation for infectious complications should be at least 1 year.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Significance of Infections in Implant Loss After Breast Reconstruction in the Course of Breast Cancer Treatment

Szymankiewicz¹,

Nowikiewicz

Biedka

2019

Polish Journal of Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Seng et al . ). While biofilms can be composed of multiple species or a single species it is the case that many diseases including nosocomial infections are essentially biofilm‐associated diseases associated with individual species, for example, Mycoplasma pneumonia, Candida albicans, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium abscessus .…”

Section: Antimicrobial and Antifungal Properties Of Biosurfactantsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The process of surface attachment and the growth of heterogeneous cells within a matrix can be considered generic, that is, common to both pathogenic and nonpathogenic micro-organisms. In pathogens, the mechanisms of attachment to and colonization of surfaces are key and there are numerous examples of clinically relevant biofilm formers, for example, Pseudomonas in the lungs (Lopes et al 2015), Pseudomonas on contact lenses (El-Ganiny et al 2017) and Staphylococci in orthopaedic implants and breast implants (Arciola et al 2015;Seng et al 2015). While biofilms can be composed of multiple species or a single species it is the case that many diseases including nosocomial infections are essentially biofilmassociated diseases associated with individual species, for example, Mycoplasma pneumonia, Candida albicans, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium abscessus.…”

Section: Antimicrobial and Antifungal Properties Of Biosurfactantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microbial biosurfactants: current trends and applications in agricultural and biomedical industries

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthetic surfactants are becoming increasingly unpopular in many applications due to previously disregarded effects on biological systems and this has led to a new focus on replacing such products with biosurfactants that are biodegradable and produced from renewal resources. Microbially derived biosurfactants have been investigated in numerous studies in areas including: increasing feed digestibility in an agricultural context, improving seed protection and fertility, plant pathogen control, antimicrobial activity, antibiofilm activity, wound healing and dermatological care, improved oral cavity care, drug delivery systems and anticancer treatments. The development of the potential of biosurfactants has been hindered somewhat by the myriad of approaches taken in their investigations, the focus on pathogens as source species and the costs associated with large‐scale production. Here, we focus on various microbial sources of biosurfactants and the current trends in terms of agricultural and biomedical applications.

show abstract

“…Staphylococci (CoNS and S. aureus ) are involved in almost all such infections, with the majority of isolates being methicillin-resistant. However, several recent studies indicate that a small but significant proportion of these infections are caused by Gram-negative bacilli such as E. coli , P. aeruginosa , and Klebsiella species [38–40]. Non-tuberculous mycobacterial and polymicrobial infections are less common but are difficult to manage [41].…”

Section: Specific Syndromes/sites Of Infectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infections in Cancer Patients with Solid Tumors: A Review

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solid tumors are much more common than hematologic malignancies. Although severe and prolonged neutropenia is uncommon, several factors increase the risk of infection in patients with solid tumors, and the presence of multiple risk factors in the same patient is not uncommon. These include obstruction (most often caused by progression of the tumor), disruption of natural anatomic barriers such as the skin and mucosal surfaces, and treatment-related factors such as chemotherapy, radiation, diagnostic and/or therapeutic surgical procedures, and the increasing use of medical devices such as various catheters, stents, and prostheses. Common sites of infection include the skin and skin structures (including surgical site infections), the bloodstream (including infections associated with central venous catheters), the lungs, the hepato-biliary and intestinal tracts, and the urinary tract, and include distinct clinical syndromes such as post-obstructive pneumonia, obstructive uropathy, and neutropenic enterocolitis. The epidemiology of most of these infections is changing with resistant organisms [MRSA, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing organisms] being isolated more often than in the past. Polymicrobial infections now predominate when deep tissue sites are involved. Conservative management of most of these infections (antibiotics, fluid and electrolyte replacement, bowel rest when needed) is generally effective, with surgical intervention being reserved for the drainage of deep abscesses, or to deal with complications such as intestinal obstruction or hemorrhage. Infected prostheses often need to be removed. Reactivation of certain viral infections (HBV, HCV, and occasionally CMV) has become an important issue, and screening, prevention and treatment strategies are being developed. Infection prevention, infection control, and antimicrobial stewardship are important strategies in the overall management of infections in patients with solid tumors. Occasionally, infections mimic solid tumors and cause diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.

show abstract

The microbial epidemiology of breast implant infections in a regional referral centre for plastic and reconstructive surgery in the south of France

Abstract: The microbiological epidemiology was noted by an increasing the proportion of Gram-negative bacteria and anaerobic bacteria detected with the advent of MALDI-TOF MS and molecular identification for diagnosis.

Cited by 72 publications

References 35 publications

Significance of Infections in Implant Loss After Breast Reconstruction in the Course of Breast Cancer Treatment

Significance of Infections in Implant Loss After Breast Reconstruction in the Course of Breast Cancer Treatment

Microbial biosurfactants: current trends and applications in agricultural and biomedical industries

Infections in Cancer Patients with Solid Tumors: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About