From the Departments of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2021 Dec 15;259(12):1416-1421. doi: 10.2460/javma.20.10.0568.
To compare bacteriologic culture results for superficial swab and tissue biopsy specimens obtained from dogs with open skin wounds.
52 client-owned dogs.
For each dog, 1 wound underwent routine preparation prior to collection of 2 specimens, 1 by superficial swab (Levine) technique and 1 by tissue biopsy. Specimens were processed for bacteriologic culture. Two observers determined whether any detected difference in culture results for the 2 types of specimen would have resulted in differing treatment plans.
Culture results of swab and tissue biopsy specimens were identical in 11/52 (21.2%) cases. Tissue biopsy specimen and swab cultures yielded positive results for 44 (84.6%) and 40 (76.9%) wounds, respectively. With regard to mean recovery rates of bacteria from wounds with positive culture results, both the biopsy specimens and swabs yielded 3.4 bacterial species/wound. All wounds for which swab cultures yielded no growth also had negative culture results for biopsy specimens. Biopsy specimen and swab culture results were in agreement with regard to the most common bacteria cultured. In 7/52 (13%) wounds, the observers would have treated the patient differently on the basis of the results of the 2 cultures.
Results indicated that culture of a swab collected by the Levine technique is an appropriate noninvasive alternative to culture of a tissue biopsy specimen. A negative result obtained from culture of a swab is likely to be reliable. Disagreement between the results of swab and tissue biopsy specimen cultures is likely of low clinical importance.
比较从患有开放性皮肤伤口的犬身上采集的表面拭子和组织活检标本的细菌培养结果。
52 只患犬。
每只犬的 1 个伤口在采集 2 个标本前进行常规准备,1 个标本采用表面拭子(Levine)技术采集,另 1 个标本采用组织活检采集。对标本进行细菌培养。2 位观察者判断 2 种标本的培养结果差异是否会导致不同的治疗方案。
在 11/52(21.2%)例中,拭子和组织活检标本的培养结果相同。组织活检标本和拭子培养分别对 44(84.6%)和 40(76.9%)个伤口呈阳性结果。就阳性培养结果的伤口中细菌的平均回收率而言,活检标本和拭子分别培养出 3.4 种/伤口的细菌。所有拭子培养无生长的伤口,其活检标本的培养结果也为阴性。在最常见培养出的细菌方面,活检标本和拭子培养结果一致。在 7/52(13%)个伤口中,观察者可能会根据 2 种培养结果对患者进行不同的治疗。
结果表明,采用 Levine 技术采集的拭子培养是一种合适的非侵入性组织活检替代方法。拭子培养阴性结果可能是可靠的。拭子和组织活检标本培养结果之间的差异可能具有较低的临床意义。