Skin wounds are a common presentation in small animal practice. The successful management of wound healing in dogs and cats requires knowledge of the physiology of the wound healing process and the application of an appropriate therapeutic intervention. Many wounds are colonised by bacteria or show signs of clinical infection. Infections can delay wound healing, impair cosmetic outcome and increase healthcare costs. Because of a lack of papers giving an overall prevalence of bacteria in different types of wounds, 45 samples were taken from patients treated at the Small Animals Clinic, Section of Surgery, Orthopaedics, Roentgenology and Reproduction of the University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy in Košice during the years 2017 — 2018 to determine the types of wounds and the prevalence of bacterial contamination of the wounds. Samples were obtained by using cotton-tipped swabs and then cultivated on Sabouraud’s plates in the Institute of Microbiology and Gnotobiology of the University. All 45 animals used in this research were first subjected to an anatomical and clinical exam to determine the patient’s health condition and the status of the wounds. Of these 45 samples, 9 were negative. Of the remaining 36 samples, 12 were cultivated and tested to give only the genera of the bacteria present, whilst 24 were tested more extensively for a specific diagnosis of the species. The most common wound was due to a bite from another animal; these made up 12 out of the 45 cases (26.67 %). There were 10 cases of dehiscence of old wounds (22.22 %), whereas there were only 2 cases of surgical wound complications (4.44 %). There were 5 puncture wounds or fistulas (11.11 %), 4 lacerations (8.88 %), 1 degloving injury (2.22 %), 1 seroma (2.22 %), 1 foreign body (2.22 %), 1 crushing injury (2.22 %), 1 case of contusion and necrosis (2.22 %), 1 cases of dermatitis with resulting pruritic lesions (2.22 %), and 1 cutting injury from a tight wire collar (2.22 %). Five cases (11.11 %) were wounds of unknown aetiology. The most commonly found bacteria was Staphylococcus intermedius, which was found in 14 out of the 45 wounds (31.11 %). From this study it appears that the first consideration for treatment of infected wounds should be a treatment plan which will have a high efficacy against Staphylococcus spp. However, despite the high prevalence of Staphylococcus spp., our results revealed that they are not present all of the time.

In a randomized multicenter study, the efficacy and safety of cefprozil were compared with those of penicillin in the treatment of group A streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis in children. Of the 409 patients enrolled, 323 were evaluable for their clinical and bacteriological responses; of these 323 children, 172 received cefprozil and 151 received penicillin V. The clinical responses in patients treated with cefprozil were significantly better than those in patients who received penicillin (95.3 versus 88.1%; P = 0.023). Eradication of the original serotype of group A streptococci was achieved in 91.3% of patients treated with cefprozil and 87.4% of patients treated with penicillin, the difference not being statistically significant (P = 0.125). However, there were significantly more symptomatic patients among the bacteriological failures in the penicillin group (68.4%) than in the cefprozil group (26.7%). 13-Lactamase-producing Staphylococcus aureus was more frequently isolated from the throat flora during penicillin therapy than during cefprozil treatment. No difference in the incidence of adverse events probably related or of unknown relationship to the study drugs was observed in the two treatment groups (5.2% of those treated with cefprozil and 6.0% of those treated with penicillin). Cefprozil can be considered a safe and reliable drug for the treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis in children.Streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis is one of the most common bacterial infections in pediatric patients. Penicillin is still considered the drug of choice, although failure rates of up to 30% have been reported (7,10,12). Since no penicillinresistant group A beta-hemolytic streptococci (GABHS) have been isolated, other reasons for the failure of therapy have been discussed, such as inactivation of penicillin by the P-lactamases produced by the concomitant throat flora or penicillin tolerance of the pathogen (2,13,14).Cephalosporins are stable to hydrolysis by the 1-lactamases of the bacteria that commonly colonize the mucous membranes of the upper respiratory tract. A meta-analysis of 19 different studies has shown that cephalosporins are more efficacious than penicillin in the treatment of streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis (19).Cefprozil is a new semisynthetic oral cephalosporin which has an in vitro spectrum that includes Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis (3, 6). Its half-life of 1.3 h allows for once-or twice-daily dosing. In one comparative study, cefprozil was evaluated for the treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis in adults, and it was found to be as efficacious as cefaclor (4). It has recently been approved in the United States for the treatment of upper respiratory tract infections in adults. We performed a multicenter trial comparing the efficacy and safety of cefprozil with those of penicillin V in 409 children with streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis. with severe renal and hepatic dysfunction, or those who had taken antibiotics within the previous 4...