Suppr超能文献

CODIFI(糖尿病足溃疡感染的一致性研究):一项针对英国感染性糖尿病足溃疡伤口拭子与组织采样的横断面研究。

CODIFI (Concordance in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Infection): a cross-sectional study of wound swab versus tissue sampling in infected diabetic foot ulcers in England.

作者信息

Nelson Andrea, Wright-Hughes Alexandra, Backhouse Michael Ross, Lipsky Benjamin A, Nixon Jane, Bhogal Moninder S, Reynolds Catherine, Brown Sarah

机构信息

School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 31;8(1):e019437. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019437.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the extent of agreement and patterns of disagreement between wound swab and tissue samples in patients with an infected diabetic foot ulcer (DFU).

DESIGN

Multicentre, prospective, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Primary and secondary care foot ulcer/diabetic outpatient clinics and hospital wards across England.

PARTICIPANTS

Inclusion criteria: consenting patients aged ≥18 years; diabetes mellitus; suspected infected DFU.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

clinically inappropriate to take either sample.

INTERVENTIONS

Wound swab obtained using Levine's technique; tissue samples collected using a sterile dermal curette or scalpel.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Coprimary: reported presence, and number, of pathogens per sample; prevalence of resistance to antimicrobials among likely pathogens. Secondary: recommended change in antibiotic therapy based on blinded clinical review; adverse events; sampling costs.

RESULTS

400 consenting patients (79% male) from 25 centres.Most prevalent reported pathogens were (43.8%), (16.7%) and other aerobic Gram-positive cocci (70.6%). At least one potential pathogen was reported from 70.1% of wound swab and 86.1% of tissue samples. Pathogen results differed between sampling methods in 58% of patients, with more pathogens and fewer contaminants reported from tissue specimens.The majority of pathogens were reported significantly more frequently in tissue than wound swab samples (P<0.01), with equal disagreement for and Blinded clinicians more often recommended a change in antibiotic regimen based on tissue compared with wound swab results (increase of 8.9%, 95% CI 2.65% to 15.3%). Ulcer pain and bleeding occurred more often after tissue collection versus wound swabs (pain: 9.3%, 1.3%; bleeding: 6.8%, 1.5%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Reports of tissue samples more frequently identified pathogens, and less frequently identified non-pathogens compared with wound swab samples. Blinded clinicians more often recommended changes in antibiotic therapy based on tissue compared with wound swab specimens. Further research is needed to determine the effect of the additional information provided by tissue samples.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN52608451.

摘要

目的

确定感染性糖尿病足溃疡(DFU)患者伤口拭子与组织样本之间的一致程度及不一致模式。

设计

多中心、前瞻性横断面研究。

地点

英格兰的基层和二级护理足部溃疡/糖尿病门诊及医院病房。

参与者

纳入标准:年龄≥18岁的同意参与患者;糖尿病;疑似感染性DFU。

排除标准

临床不适宜采集任何一种样本。

干预措施

采用莱文氏技术获取伤口拭子;使用无菌皮肤刮匙或手术刀采集组织样本。

观察指标

共同主要指标:每份样本报告的病原体存在情况及数量;可能病原体中对抗菌药物的耐药率。次要指标:基于盲法临床评估推荐的抗生素治疗方案改变;不良事件;采样成本。

结果

来自25个中心的400名同意参与的患者(79%为男性)。报告的最常见病原体为 (43.8%)、 (16.7%)和其他需氧革兰氏阳性球菌(70.6%)。70.1%的伤口拭子和86.1%的组织样本报告至少有一种潜在病原体。58%的患者采样方法之间病原体结果不同,组织标本报告的病原体更多,污染物更少。大多数病原体在组织样本中报告的频率显著高于伤口拭子样本(P<0.01), 和 的不一致情况相同。与伤口拭子结果相比,盲法临床医生更常根据组织样本结果推荐改变抗生素治疗方案(增加8.9%,95%置信区间2.65%至15.3%)。与伤口拭子相比,采集组织样本后溃疡疼痛和出血更常发生(疼痛:9.3%,1.3%;出血:分别为6.8%,1.5%)。

结论

与伤口拭子样本相比,组织样本报告更常识别出病原体,更少识别出非病原体。与伤口拭子标本相比,盲法临床医生更常根据组织样本结果推荐改变抗生素治疗方案。需要进一步研究以确定组织样本提供的额外信息的影响。

试验注册号

ISRCTN52608451。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fefe/5879729/3e49e5d1ef66/bmjopen-2017-019437f01.jpg

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