Advertisement
ProCite
RefWorks
Reference Manager
BibTeX
Zotero
EndNote
-
1.
Hamil LE, Smeak DD, Johnson VA, Dow SW. Pretreatment aerobic bacterial swab cultures to predict infection in acute open traumatic wounds: a prospective clinical study of 64 dogs. Vet Surg. 2020;49(5):914–922.
-
2.
Robson MC. Wound infection. A failure of wound healing caused by an imbalance of bacteria. Surg Clin North Am. 1997;77(3):637–650.
-
3.
Ratliff CR, Rodeheaver GT. Correlation of semi-quantitative swab cultures to quantitative swab cultures from chronic wounds. Wounds. 2002;14(9):329–333.
-
4.
Bonham PA. Swab cultures for diagnosing wound infections: a literature review and clinical guideline. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2009;36(4):389–395.
-
5.
Bowler PG, Duerden BI, Armstrong DG. Wound microbiology and associated approaches to wound management. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2001;14(2):244–269.
-
6.
Bill TJ, Ratliff CR, Donovan AM, Knox LK, Morgan RF, Rodeheaver GT. Quantitative swab culture versus tissue biopsy: a comparison in chronic wounds. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2001;47(1):34–37.
-
7.
Slater RA, Lazarovitch T, Boldur I, et al. Swab cultures accurately identify bacterial pathogens in diabetic foot wounds not involving bone. Diabet Med. 2004;21(7):705–709.
-
8.
Gardner SE, Frantz RA, Saltzman CL, Hillis SL, Park H, Scherubel M. Diagnostic validity of three swab techniques for identifying chronic wound infection. Wound Repair Regen. 2006;14(5):548–557.
-
9.
Uppal SK, Ram S, Kwatra B, Garg S, Gupta R. Comparative evaluation of surface swab and quantitative full thickness wound biopsy culture in burn patients. Burns. 2007;33(4):460–463.
-
10.
Huang Y, Cao Y, Zou M, et al. A comparison of tissue versus swab culturing of infected diabetic foot wounds. Int J Endocrinol. 2016;2016:8198714. doi:10.1155/2016/8198714
-
11.
Haalboom M, Blokhuis-Arkes MH, Beuk RJ, et al. Wound swab and wound biopsy yield similar culture results. Wound Repair Regen. 2018;26(2):192–199.
-
12.
O'Meara S, Nelson EA, Golder S, et al. Systematic review of methods to diagnose infection in foot ulcers in diabetes. Diabet Med. 2006;23(4):341–347.
-
13.
Esposito S, De Simone G, Gioia R, et al. Deep tissue biopsy vs. superficial swab culture, including microbial loading determination, in the microbiological assessment of Skin and Soft Tissue Infections (SSTIs). J Chemother. 2017;29(3):154–158.
-
14.
Van Hecke LL, Hermans K, Haspeslagh M, et al. A quantitative swab is a good non-invasive alternative to a quantitative biopsy for quantifying bacterial load in wounds healing by second intention in horses. Vet J. 2017;225:63–68.
-
15.
Concannon TM, Kidd L, Osmond C, Dong F, Griffon D. Prospective evaluation of the influence of sampling method on bacterial culture results and antimicrobial selection in 52 dogs with infected wounds. J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2020;30(2):149–158.
-
16.
Levine NS, Lindberg RB, Mason AD Jr, Pruitt BA Jr. The quantitative swab culture and smear: a quick, simple method for determining the number of viable aerobic bacteria on open wounds. J Trauma. 1976;16(2):89–94.
-
17.
Fleiss JL. The measurement and control of misclassification error. In: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons; 1981:140–154.
-
18.
Weese JS. A review of multidrug resistant surgical site infections. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol. 2008;21(1):1–7.
-
19.
Padhy A, Mishra R, Behera SS, et al. Microbial profile of canine persistent wound infections. Vet World. 2014;7(4):244–247. doi:10.14202/vetworld.2014.244-247
-
20.
Urumova V, Chaprazov T, Lyutskanov M, Borisov I. Microbiological analyses of canine infected wounds. Rev Med Vet. 2012;163:201–205.
-
21.
Angel DE, Lloyd P, Carville K, Santamaria N. The clinical efficacy of two semi-quantitative wound-swabbing techniques in identifying the causative organism(s) in infected cutaneous wounds. Int Wound J. 2011;8(2):176–185.
-
22.
Copeland-Halperin LR, Kaminsky AJ, Bluefeld N, Miraliakbari R. Sample procurement for cultures of infected wounds: a systematic review. J Wound Care. 2016;25 (4):S4–S6, S8–S10.
Advertisement
Comparison of bacteriologic culture results for skin wound swabs and skin wound biopsy specimens
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To compare bacteriologic culture results for superficial swab and tissue biopsy specimens obtained from dogs with open skin wounds.
ANIMALS
52 client-owned dogs.
PROCEDURES
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.
RESULTS
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.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE
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.
Contributor Notes
Powered by PubFactory