AzTrials
AzTrials

Diabetic Foot OsteomyelitisNCT04240964

Studying on the Difference Between Two Kinds of Osteomyelitis

An observational study of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis and Diabetic Foot Infection, run by Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University at 1 site in China.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

To explore the microbial differences of diabetic foot osteomyelitis and osteomyelitis without diabetes. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 80 years
How many people
28 participants
Where
1 siteChina
Study dates
1 Jul 2017to 1 Dec 2018
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 80 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: patients with osteomyelitis

Who may be able to join

  • age≥18 years old.
  • diagnosed as foot osteomyelitis, and wounds were located below the knee joint.
  • nfected bone exposure or positive probe-to-bone test.
  • The patients were good physical condition.
  • Patients were able to tolerate debridement or operation treatment.
  • patients and their families agreed to participate in the study.

Who cannot join

  • Serious skin diseases around the wound surface;
  • tumors affecting the wound of osteomyelitis;
  • long-term use of immunosuppressive therapy before admission;
  • patients that do not cooperate.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

China1 site
  • Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, NanFang Hospital, Southern Medical University

    Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510515

Other trials in China

About this study

Official title: Studying on the Difference Between Foot Osteomyelitis Patients With or Without Diabetes

To explore the microbial differences of diabetic foot osteomyelitis and osteomyelitis without diabetes.

Read the detailed description

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (Dd group) subjects (sample size ≥ 10 cases) and foot osteomyelitis without diabetes (ND group) subjects (sample size ≥ 10 cases) were collected in accordance with the inclusion criteria. Surgeons collected intra-operative bone specimens from all 28 patients who required surgical intervention (debridement or amputation) for management of their osteomyelitis[10]. Avoided soft tissue or sinus tract cultures, because they were not sufficiently accurate in predicting bone pathogens[11]. Following surgical debridement of infected or necrotic tissue, cleansed by sterile saline solution, deep bone specimens were harvested using sterile instruments. We routinely obtained adequate bone specimens and divided them into three parts. One for routine microbiology culture and antibiotic sensitivity testing, one for the histopathology, and the other one for DNA sequencing analysis. This process to obtain bone specimens could reduce chances of contamination by wound tissue colonizing bacteria.

16S rRNA high-throughput sequencing Two specimens were sent to the laboratory for conventional culturing and histopathological tests. The bone specimen left were placed in sterile pipes without any transport medium and stored at 4℃ for 24 hours and then frozen at -80C until DNA extraction. Genomic DNA was extracted using DNA extraction kit (YiRui,ShenZhen,China) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Extracted DNA was quantitative and quality control by agarose gel electrophoresis(JS-power 300, PeiQin, ShangHai, China). Then we amplified the V3-V4 variable region of the 16S rRNA gene for sequencing using a forward and a reverse fusion primer-(341F:5'-CCTAYGGGRBGCASCAG-3' and 806R:5'-GGACTACNNGGGTATCTAAT-3)(ABI GeneAmp 9700 PCR Instrument). PCR products were amplified by removing short sequences, singleton sequences and noisy reads. The PCR reaction was performed in a total volume of 60 μl, containing 6 μl of 10× Ex Tap PCR buffer, 6 μl of dNTP mixture, 0.6μl of bovine serum albumin (BSA), 0.3 μl Ex Tag, 1μl DNA, 1.2μl forward and reverse primers, and 43.7 μlH 2O. The PCR amplification was conducted under following conditions: initial denaturing was conducted at 94°Cfor5min, which was followed by 27 cycles at94°Cfor30s, 55°Cfor30s, and72°C for 45s. A final extension was performed at 72°C for 10min from 28 samples (including DFO and SFO patients) were sequenced over two separate runs on Illumina Miseq. To get high-quality clean reads, raw reads were filtered according to the following rules: (1) remove reads containing morethan10% ofunknown nucleotides and(2) removereads containing less than 80% of bases with quality (Q-value)>20. The filtered reads were then assembled into tags according to overlap between paired-end reads with more than 10bp overlap, and less than 2% mismatch. The software Mothur (v.1.34.0) was used to remove the redundant tags to get unique tags. The obtained unique tags were then used to calculate the abundance.Then we clustered sequences into operational taxonomic units (OTUs) using the Greengene. Taxonomy was assigned to OTUs using the BLASTto the Greengene database at 97% similarity to identify microorganisms at the genera level (species level where possible). A phylogenetic tree was built from aligned representative OTU sequences using figtree.The total species diversity in a landscape was determined by two different parameters, the mean species diversity in sites or habitats at a more local scale (alpha diversity) and the differentiation among those habitats (beta diversity). Alpha diversity included both community diversity and richness: community richness was represented by the ACE estimator or the Chao1 estimator. Beta diversity was the calculation of differences(distance) between microbiome community structure and membership based on the evolution of species. This kind of distance was calculated using Weighted Unifrac and can be performanced by Principal Co-ordinates Analysis diagram.

Metagenomes Analysis A metagenome DNA libraries from specimens were constructed using TruSeq Nano DNA kit (FC-121-4002) according to the manufacturer's instructions, with slight modifications. In brief, the length conformed DNA(350 bp) was obtained by sonication. DNA fragments were end-repaired and the appropriate library size was selected, then the samples were A-tailed and ligated to adapters. The NovaSeq 6000 sequencing systems(Illumina)were used for sequencing and library validation Raw Data obtained by sequencing have a certain proportion of low-quality dataaccording to the following rules: (1) remove reads containing morethan10% ofunknown nucleotides and(2) removereads containing less than 80% of bases with quality (Q-value)>20 . Megahit was used to splice the sequences(clean data) after quality control, and contigs were obtained.Contigs were filtered below 1000bp. The vector and host sequences were filtered by BLASTN, with an E-value cutoff of 1e-5. The remaining reads were mapped to the human genome by SOAP alignment, and the matching reads were removed as being contaminants from the host genome.The taxonomic classifications were performed on assembled contigs and singletons using BLAST against the NCBI database. And the best BLAST hit was used to refer the taxonomic rank of each sequence. All the analyses have been performed in R and p values were corrected for multiple testing with the false discovery rate method.

Keywords
Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis, 16S rRNA, Metagenomes, Microbiome

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Other

Study groups in NCT04240964
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Dd groupPatients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis
ND groupFoot osteomyelitis without diabetes

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Composition and Diversity of DFO with 16S rRNA Gene Data

    Subjects who met the inclusion criteria for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) (sample size ≥ 10) and osteomyelitis without NDFO (sample size ≥ 10) were collected for debridement and amputation for 16s rDNA high-throughput sequencing. Compare microbe composition and diversity between the two groups.

    Measured: 2017-2018

  2. Composition of the DFO Metagenome

    Subjects who met the inclusion criteria for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) (sample size ≥ 10) and osteomyelitis without NDFO (sample size ≥ 10) were collected for debridement and amputation for Metagenomic Analysis. Compare microbe composition and diversity between the two groups.

    Measured: 2018-2019

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted27 Jan 2020
  2. Study start1 Jul 2017
  3. Primary completion1 Dec 2018
  4. Study completion1 Dec 2018

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
28 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04240964
Sponsor's protocol ID
NFEC-2017-013
Status last verified
Jan 2020
First submitted
28 Oct 2019
Last updated
27 Jan 2020
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Publications

  • Lavery LA, Peters EJ, Armstrong DG, Wendel CS, Murdoch DP, Lipsky BA. Risk factors for developing osteomyelitis in patients with diabetic foot wounds. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2009 Mar;83(3):347-52. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2008.11.030. Epub 2008 Dec 30.

    PubMed 19117631
  • Berendt AR, Peters EJ, Bakker K, Embil JM, Eneroth M, Hinchliffe RJ, Jeffcoate WJ, Lipsky BA, Senneville E, Teh J, Valk GD. Diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a progress report on diagnosis and a systematic review of treatment. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2008 May-Jun;24 Suppl 1:S145-61. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.836.

    PubMed 18442163
  • Valabhji J, Oliver N, Samarasinghe D, Mali T, Gibbs RG, Gedroyc WM. Conservative management of diabetic forefoot ulceration complicated by underlying osteomyelitis: the benefits of magnetic resonance imaging. Diabet Med. 2009 Nov;26(11):1127-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02828.x.

    PubMed 19929991
  • Huang Y, Cao Y, Zou M, Luo X, Jiang Y, Xue Y, Gao F. A Comparison of Tissue versus Swab Culturing of Infected Diabetic Foot Wounds. Int J Endocrinol. 2016;2016:8198714. doi: 10.1155/2016/8198714. Epub 2016 Mar 30.

    PubMed 27123004
  • Goda A, Maruyama F, Michi Y, Nakagawa I, Harada K. Analysis of the factors affecting the formation of the microbiome associated with chronic osteomyelitis of the jaw. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014 May;20(5):O309-17. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12400. Epub 2013 Nov 11.

    PubMed 24112138
  • Redel H, Gao Z, Li H, Alekseyenko AV, Zhou Y, Perez-Perez GI, Weinstock G, Sodergren E, Blaser MJ. Quantitation and composition of cutaneous microbiota in diabetic and nondiabetic men. J Infect Dis. 2013 Apr;207(7):1105-14. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jit005. Epub 2013 Jan 8.

    PubMed 23300163
  • Zou M, Cai Y, Hu P, Cao Y, Luo X, Fan X, Zhang B, Wu X, Jiang N, Lin Q, Zhou H, Xue Y, Gao F. Analysis of the Composition and Functions of the Microbiome in Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis Based on 16S rRNA and Metagenome Sequencing Technology. Diabetes. 2020 Nov;69(11):2423-2439. doi: 10.2337/db20-0503. Epub 2020 Aug 14.

    PubMed 32801139

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis and Diabetic Foot Infection, run by Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University at 1 site in China.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Jan 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Composition and Diversity of DFO with 16S rRNA Gene Data (time frame: 2017-2018). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04240964, which also lists 7 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Jan 2020; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 31 Oct 2026.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in