Breidenbach W C, Trager S
Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Ky, USA.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995 Apr;95(5):860-5.
The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to determine if there is a relationship between a critical quantity of bacteria and infection in complex extremity wounds, and (2) to compare the positive and negative predictive values, sensitivities, and specificities of the following laboratory and clinical tests of potential wound infections: quantitative cultures, swab cultures, mechanism of injury, severity of fracture, and wound position. Fifty patients were evaluated who had 50 free-tissue transfers. Twenty-eight patients had quantitative cultures prior to flap coverage. All 50 patients were evaluated for wound position, presence or absence of a fracture, and mechanism of injury; 16 patients had swab cultures. The best positive predictive value (89 percent) and negative predictive value (95 percent), along with sensitivity (89 percent) and specificity (95 percent), for predicting wound infection were those of quantitative cultures. This demonstrates that in the clinical setting of this study, the test with the highest utility and validity is quantitative cultures.
(1)确定复杂肢体伤口中临界细菌数量与感染之间是否存在关联;(2)比较以下潜在伤口感染的实验室和临床检测方法的阳性预测值、阴性预测值、敏感性和特异性:定量培养、拭子培养、损伤机制、骨折严重程度和伤口位置。对50例行游离组织移植的患者进行了评估。28例患者在皮瓣覆盖前进行了定量培养。对所有50例患者的伤口位置、有无骨折及损伤机制进行了评估;16例患者进行了拭子培养。预测伤口感染的最佳阳性预测值(89%)、阴性预测值(95%)、敏感性(89%)和特异性(95%)来自定量培养。这表明在本研究的临床环境中,效用和效度最高的检测方法是定量培养。