Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Robert W. Walker x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Objective

To define the extent to which Malassezia organisms can be recovered from the skin of clinically normal dogs and to assess differences in organism recovery related to anatomic sampling site and to method of collection.

Design

Prospective, controlled study.

Animals

19 clinically normal dogs.

Procedure

The number of Malassezia pachydermatis organisms were determined in fungal cultures of samples obtained from the skin of clinically normal dogs, using an adhesive tape method to obtain samples from 10 sites/dog. Additionally, 3 methods (direct impression, swabbing technique, and superficial skin scraping) that are commonly used for obtaining samples for cytologic examination were evaluated.

Results

Malassezia organisms were found in low numbers as part of the microflora of the skin of clinically normal dogs. Number of organisms differed significantly for various anatomic locations (chin, highest number; inguinal and axillary regions, lowest number). Malassezia organisms were identified more frequently by use of adhesive tape and fungal culturing than by the methods used for cytologic examination. However, comparing methods used for obtaining samples for cytologic examination with each other, marked differences were not detected in our ability to recover yeast organisms among the 3 techniques.

Clinical Implications

Although Malassezia spp is part of the microflora of the skin of clinically normal dogs, it is extremely difficult to detect the organism by any of the 3 sampling methods used for sample collection for cytologic examination. Therefore, anatomic site and method of sample collection should be considered when attempting to make a diagnosis of Malassezia dermatitis. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;208:1048–1051)

Free access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract

Objective—To determine sources of Salmonella organisms in a veterinary teaching hospital, compare bacterial culture with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for detection of Salmonella organisms in environmental samples, and evaluate the effects of various disinfectants on detection of Salmonella organisms on surface materials.

Design—Prospective study.

Sample Population—Fecal samples from 638 hospitalized horses and 783 environmental samples.

Procedure—Standard bacterial culture techniques were used; the PCR test amplified a segment of the Salmonella DNA. Five disinfectants were mixed with Salmonella suspensions, and bacterial culture was performed. Swab samples were collected from 7 surface materials after inoculation of the surfaces with Salmonella Typhimurium, with or without addition of a disinfectant, and submitted for bacterial culture and PCR testing.

ResultsSalmonella organisms were detected in fecal samples from 35 (5.5%) horses. For environmental samples, the proportion of positive bacterial culture results (1/783) was significantly less than the proportion of positive PCR test results (110/783), probably because of detection of nonviable DNA by the PCR test. Detection of Salmonella organisms varied with the surface material tested, the method of detection (bacterial culture vs PCR testing), and the presence and type of disinfectant.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results of the present study suggested that Salmonella organisms can be isolated from feces of hospitalized horses and a variety of environmental surfaces in a large animal hospital. Although recovery of Salmonella organisms was affected by surface material and disinfectant, bleach was the most effective disinfectant on the largest number of surfaces tested. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:1145–1151)

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association