2022
DOI: 10.1007/s12262-021-03190-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A New Device and Technology for Detecting Bacterial Infection and its Gram Type in Diabetic Foot Ulcer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0
2

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
1
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The excitation of porphyrins with blue light (excitation wavelength: 405 nm) results in the emission of red fluorescence. For example, the Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacterium produces a typical green/cyan fluorescence signal (emission wavelength: 460 nm) due to the presence of fluorescent siderophores, pyocyanin and pyoverdine [51]. The Gram-type of bacteria can also be distinguished with the characteristic autofluorescence emission; Gram-negative bacteria have a higher intensity of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) (emission wavelength: 470 nm) and flavin (emission wavelength: 525 nm) than gram-positive bacteria [52].…”
Section: Wound Infection Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The excitation of porphyrins with blue light (excitation wavelength: 405 nm) results in the emission of red fluorescence. For example, the Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacterium produces a typical green/cyan fluorescence signal (emission wavelength: 460 nm) due to the presence of fluorescent siderophores, pyocyanin and pyoverdine [51]. The Gram-type of bacteria can also be distinguished with the characteristic autofluorescence emission; Gram-negative bacteria have a higher intensity of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) (emission wavelength: 470 nm) and flavin (emission wavelength: 525 nm) than gram-positive bacteria [52].…”
Section: Wound Infection Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alat ini juga dapat mengukur dimensi ulkus, sehingga mengukut lama waktu penyembuhan luka. Laporan hasil dari pendokumentasian menggunakan alat tersebut dapat disimpan dan ditransfer baik menggunakan drive USB atau melalui cloud, terhubung dengan catatan rumah sakit (Parekh, Soni, Meena, Tandel, & Radhakrishanan, 2022). Kecanggihan alat ini mendorong peneliti untuk mengevaluasi akurasi dari FL-Imaging Device dan membandingkannya dengan standar emas yang digunakan saat ini.…”
Section: Pendahuluanunclassified
“…Dari 149 luka, FL-Imaging Device mendeteksi bakteri pada 89,9% (134/149) luka, hal tersebut dibandingkan dengan hasil kultur luka yang dilakukan di dalam lab, dan hasilnya adalah dari 149 luka diketahui bahwa hanya 88,5% (132/149) luka yang terdeteksi adanya bakteri. Sehingga dalam penelitiannya disimpulkan bahwa FL-Imaging Device memiliki keakuratan sebesar 99,24% (Parekh, Soni, Meena, Tandel, & Radhakrishanan, 2022). Pada 203 luka, FL-Imaging Device dapat mendeteksi bakteri pada 71,92% (146/203) luka, dan hal tersebut dibandingkan dengan hasil kultur yang telah dilakukan yaitu terdapat bakteri pada 86,2% (175/203) luka.…”
Section: Pembahasan Akurasi Dalam Mendeteksi Bakteri Dan Pengukuran Lukaunclassified