Bacterial Infections Complicating Tongue Piercing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tongue piercing has become an increasingly popular form of body art. However, this procedure can occasionally be complicated by serious bacterial infections. The present article reports a case of prosthetic valve endocarditis caused by a Gemella species in a patient with a pierced tongue, and reviews 18 additional cases of local and systemic bacterial infections associated with tongue piercing. Infections localized to the oral cavity and head and neck region included molar abscess, glossal abscess, glossitis, submandibular lymphadenitis, submandibular sialadenitis, Ludwig's angina and cephalic tetanus. Infections distal to the piercing site included eight cases of infective endocarditis, one case of chorioamnionitis and one case of cerebellar abscess. Oropharyngeal flora were isolated from all cases. While bacterial infections following tongue piercing are rare, there are reports of potentially life-threatening infections associated with the procedure. Both piercers and their clients should be aware of these potential complications, and standardized infection prevention and control practices should be adopted by piercers to reduce the risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".