Hebrew Rehabilitation Center, 1200 Centre St, Boston, MA 02131, USA.
JAMA. 2012 Feb 8;307(6):605-11. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.98.
Chronic wounds (those that have not undergone orderly healing) are commonly encountered, but determining whether wounds are infected is often difficult. The current reference standard for the diagnosis of infection of a chronic wound is a deep tissue biopsy culture, which is an invasive procedure.
To determine the accuracy of clinical symptoms and signs to diagnose infection in chronic wounds and to determine whether there is a preferred noninvasive method for culturing chronic wounds.
We searched multiple databases from inception through November 18, 2011, to identify studies focusing on diagnosis of infection in a chronic wound.
Original studies were selected if they had extractable data describing historical features, symptoms, signs, or laboratory markers or were radiologic studies compared with a reference standard for diagnosing infection in patients with chronic wounds. Of 341 studies initially retrieved, 15 form the basis of this review. These studies include 985 participants with a total of 1056 chronic wounds. The summary prevalence of wound infection was 53%.
Three authors independently assigned each study a quality grade, using previously published criteria. One author abstracted operating characteristic data.
An increase in the level of pain (likelihood ratio range, 11-20) made infection more likely, but its absence (negative likelihood ratio range, 0.64-0.88) did not rule out infection. Other items in the history and physical examination, in isolation or in combination, appeared to have limited utility when infection was diagnosed in chronic wounds. Routine laboratory studies had uncertain value in predicting infection of a chronic wound.
The presence of increasing pain may make infection of a chronic wound more likely. Further evidence is required to determine which, if any, type of quantitative swab culture is most diagnostic.
慢性伤口(未进行有序愈合的伤口)很常见,但确定伤口是否感染通常很困难。目前,慢性伤口感染诊断的参考标准是深部组织活检培养,这是一种有创性操作。
确定临床症状和体征诊断慢性伤口感染的准确性,并确定是否存在一种首选的非侵入性方法来培养慢性伤口。
我们从创建到 2011 年 11 月 18 日搜索了多个数据库,以确定专注于慢性伤口感染诊断的研究。
如果原始研究有可提取的数据描述病史、症状、体征或实验室标志物,或者是与慢性伤口感染诊断参考标准进行比较的影像学研究,则选择原始研究。最初检索到的 341 项研究中,有 15 项为本综述的基础。这些研究包括 985 名参与者,共有 1056 例慢性伤口。伤口感染的总患病率为 53%。
三位作者使用先前发表的标准,独立地为每项研究分配质量等级。一位作者提取了操作特征数据。
疼痛程度的增加(似然比范围,11-20)使感染更有可能,但疼痛的不存在(负似然比范围,0.64-0.88)并不能排除感染。病史和体检中的其他项目,单独或组合使用,在诊断慢性伤口感染时似乎没有多大用处。常规实验室研究在预测慢性伤口感染方面的价值不确定。
疼痛程度的增加可能使慢性伤口感染的可能性更大。需要进一步的证据来确定哪种(如果有)定量拭子培养最具诊断价值。