2018
DOI: 10.1080/21505594.2018.1425072
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards clinical application of non-invasive imaging to detect bacterial infections

Abstract: In vivo imaging technologies offer a great potential for the diagnosis of difficult-to-treat bacterial infections. A major limitation of conventional imaging modalities is the lack of specificity to distinguish the site of bacterial infection from sterile inflammation. Targeted approaches like antibiotics linked to imaging tracers for detection of various bacterial pathogens or species-specific antibodies combined with anatomical imaging modalities are currently being evaluated to overcome this problem. Consid… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
(19 reference statements)
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such investigation of bacterial colonization in humans would benefit from methods for tracking bacteria using noninvasive imaging modalities. 5 Thus far, dedicated imaging of bacterial infections in preclinical studies mostly relies on optical imaging of genetically modified bioluminescent strains that express plasmid-integrated luciferase genes 6 or ultrasound imaging of strains that express acoustic reporter genes. 7 Although a useful preclinical tool, the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) purely for clinical-imaging purposes is not considered to be acceptable for safety reasons.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such investigation of bacterial colonization in humans would benefit from methods for tracking bacteria using noninvasive imaging modalities. 5 Thus far, dedicated imaging of bacterial infections in preclinical studies mostly relies on optical imaging of genetically modified bioluminescent strains that express plasmid-integrated luciferase genes 6 or ultrasound imaging of strains that express acoustic reporter genes. 7 Although a useful preclinical tool, the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) purely for clinical-imaging purposes is not considered to be acceptable for safety reasons.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to previous studies, conventional imaging techniques have limitations in distinguishing bacterial infection from sterile inflammation. The ability to non- invasive identification of infection and more sensitively and specifically would aid in the diagnosis of infection[ 9 , 10 ]. Delayed diagnosis of odontogenic infections can allow their spread to neighboring head and neck regions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While requiring fewer hosts to produce workable data, the requirement to minimize invasive observational effects can become a limitation [36]. One attractive route is to use fluorescent or luminescent pathogen strains, that can be imaged within a host non-invasively [37]. This path has been taken in diverse animal models, from mice [38] to nematodes [39], although calibration of infection burden is a concern – typically these reporter construct studies are more focused on location of infection [28,40] rather than estimating burden.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%