Intelligent Bayes Classifier (IBC) for ENT infection classification in hospital environment

The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients

Breath analysis using eNose technology can be used to discriminate between asthma and COPD patients, but it remains unclear whether results are influenced by smoking status. We aim to study whether eNose can discriminate between ever- vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h before the exhaled breath, and if smoking can be considered a confounder that influences eNose results. We performed a cross-sectional analysis in adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and healthy controls. Ever-smokers were defined as patients with current or past smoking habits. eNose measurements were performed by using the SpiroNose. The principal component (PC) described the eNose signals, and linear discriminant analysis determined if PCs classified ever-smokers vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h. The area under the receiver–operator characteristic curve (AUC) assessed the accuracy of the models. We selected 593 ever-smokers (167 smoked <24 h before measurement) and 303 never-smokers and measured the exhaled breath profiles of discriminated ever- and never-smokers (AUC: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.66–0.81), and no cigarette consumption <24h (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43–0.65). In healthy controls, the eNose did not discriminate between ever or never-smokers (AUC 0.54; 95% CI: 0.49–0.60) and recent cigarette consumption (AUC 0.60; 95% CI: 0.50–0.69). The eNose could distinguish between ever and never-smokers in asthma and COPD patients, but not recent smokers. Recent smoking is not a confounding factor of eNose breath profiles.

Electronic Nose in the Detection of Wound Infection Bacteria from Bacterial Cultures: A Proof-of-Principle Study

BACKGROUND

Soft tissue infections, including postoperative wound infections, result in a significant burden for modern society. Rapid diagnosis of wound infections is based on bacterial stains, cultures, and polymerase chain reaction assays, and the results are available earliest after several hours, but more often not until days after. Therefore, antibiotic treatment is often administered empirically without a specific diagnosis.

METHODS

We employed our electronic nose (eNose) system for this proof-of-concept study, aiming to differentiate the most relevant bacteria causing wound infections utilizing a set of clinical bacterial cultures on identical blood culture dishes, and established bacterial lines from the gaseous headspace.

RESULTS

Our eNose system was capable of differentiating both methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Streptococcus pyogenes, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Clostridium perfringens with an accuracy of 78% within minutes without prior sample preparation. Most importantly, the system was capable of differentiating MRSA from MSSA with a sensitivity of 83%, a specificity of 100%, and an overall accuracy of 91%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the concept of rapid detection of the most relevant bacteria causing wound infections and ultimately differentiating MRSA from MSSA utilizing gaseous headspace sampling with an eNose.

Genotypic analysis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from ocular infection

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the causative pathogen of keratitis, conjunctivitis, and dacryocystitis. However little is known about their clinical epidemiology in Japan. In this study we investigated the genotypic characterization and serotype of P. aeruginosa isolates from ocular infections. Thirty-four clinical P. aeruginosa isolates were characterized according to infection type, the type III secretion system (TTSS), serotype, and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). We divided the isolates into four clinical infection types as follows: Contact lens (CL)-related keratitis (CL-keratitis; 15 isolates), non CL-related keratitis (non CL-keratitis; 8 isolates), conjunctivitis (7 isolates), and dacryocystitis (4 isolates). Regarding the TTSS classification and serotyping classification, no significant differences were found among the infection types. Two clusters (I, II) and three subclusters (A, B, C) were classified according to MLST. CL-keratitis isolates with exoU positivity were clustered in II-B, and conjunctivitis was clustered in cluster I. Some linkage was found between the genetic background and CL-keratitis or conjunctivitis.

Exhaled breath analysis by electronic nose in airways disease. Established issues and key questions

Exhaled air contains many volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that are the result of normal and disease-associated metabolic processes anywhere in the body. Different omics techniques can assess the pattern of these VOCs. One such omics technique suitable for breath analysis is represented by electronic noses (eNoses), providing fingerprints of the exhaled VOCs, called breathprints. Breathprints have been shown to be altered in different disease states, including in asthma and COPD. This review describes the current status on clinical validation and application of breath analysis by electronic noses in the diagnosis and monitoring of chronic airways diseases. Furthermore, important methodological issues including breath sampling, modulating factors and incompatibility between eNoses are raised and discussed. Next steps towards clinical application of electronic noses are provided, including further validation in suspected disease, assessment of the influence of different comorbidities, the value in longitudinal monitoring of patients with asthma and COPD and the possibility to predict treatment responses. Eventually, a Breath Cloud may be constructed, a large database containing disease-specific breathprints. When collaborative efforts are put into optimization of this technique, it can provide a rapid and non-invasive first line diagnostic test.