Suppr超能文献

慢性伤口培养技术的比较:拭子法与刮除组织法在微生物回收方面的比较。

Comparison of chronic wound culture techniques: swab versus curetted tissue for microbial recovery.

作者信息

Smith Maria Elisa, Robinowitz Natanya, Chaulk Patrick, Johnson Kristine

机构信息

Research Assistant, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland.

出版信息

Br J Community Nurs. 2014 Sep;Suppl(9 0):S22-6. doi: 10.12968/bjcn.2014.19.Sup9.S22.

Abstract

Health-care professionals are increasingly relying on wound cultures as part of their clinical assessment. Tissue viability nurses in the UK use wound swabbing as the standard specimen-taking technique, but others are used globally and there is no worldwide standard. This study compares two wound culture techniques in uninfected chronic wounds of active and former injection drug users seeking care through a civic needle exchange mobile wound clinic. For each wound, two sampling approaches were applied during the same visit: swab culture and curetted tissue culture. A total of 12 chronic wounds were assessed among 9 patients, including 19 swab cultures and 19 tissue cultures. These 38 cultures grew a total of 157 individually identified bacterial organisms, including 27 anaerobic organisms (17.2%), 63 Gram-positive species (40.1%), and 67 Gram-negative species (42.7%). The swab technique yielded a greater percentage recovery rate of anaerobic (55.6%), Gram-positive (52.4%), and all species (51.6%) compared to tissue culture (P>0.05). Recovery of common wound species, such as methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the same using either method (50.0%). Swab and curetted tissue cultures yielded similar recovery rates for common wound bacteria. Therefore, swabs (including a vacuum transport container) may offer an advantage in the recovery of anaerobes. Based upon this analysis, the swabbased culture method for chronic wounds currently used in the UK is reasonable.

摘要

医疗保健专业人员越来越多地依赖伤口培养作为临床评估的一部分。英国的组织活力护士将伤口拭子采样作为标准的标本采集技术,但全球也使用其他方法,且没有全球统一标准。本研究比较了两种伤口培养技术,对象是通过公民针头交换移动伤口诊所寻求护理的现役和 former 注射吸毒者的未感染慢性伤口。对于每个伤口,在同一次就诊期间应用两种采样方法:拭子培养和刮除组织培养。对9名患者的12处慢性伤口进行了评估,包括19次拭子培养和19次组织培养。这38次培养共培养出157种单独鉴定的细菌,包括27种厌氧菌(17.2%)、63种革兰氏阳性菌(40.1%)和67种革兰氏阴性菌(42.7%)。与组织培养相比,拭子技术对厌氧菌(55.6%)、革兰氏阳性菌(52.4%)和所有菌种(51.6%)的回收率更高(P>0.05)。使用任何一种方法,常见伤口菌种如甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌、甲氧西林耐药金黄色葡萄球菌和铜绿假单胞菌的回收率相同(50.0%)。拭子和刮除组织培养对常见伤口细菌的回收率相似。因此,拭子(包括真空运输容器)在厌氧菌的回收方面可能具有优势。基于此分析,英国目前用于慢性伤口的基于拭子的培养方法是合理的。 (注:原文中“former”疑似有误,可能是“former”应为“former”,这里暂按“former”翻译为“以前的”)

相似文献

8
Wound swab and wound biopsy yield similar culture results.伤口拭子和伤口活检产生相似的培养结果。
Wound Repair Regen. 2018 Mar;26(2):192-199. doi: 10.1111/wrr.12629. Epub 2018 May 19.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Swab versus biopsy for the diagnosis of chronic infected wounds.拭子与活检在慢性感染性伤口诊断中的比较。
Adv Skin Wound Care. 2013 May;26(5):211-9. doi: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000428984.58483.aa.
5
Microbial diversity in chronic open wounds.慢性开放性伤口中的微生物多样性
Wound Repair Regen. 2009 Mar-Apr;17(2):163-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2009.00472.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验