Wound swab and wound biopsy yield similar culture results

Abstract

The question remains whether wound swabs yield similar culture results to the traditional gold standard, biopsies. Swabs are not invasive and easy to perform. However, they are believed to capture microorganisms from the surface rather than microorganisms that have invaded tissue. Several studies compared swabs and biopsies using different populations and sampling methods, complicating the ability to draw conclusions for clinical practice. This study aimed to compare swab and biopsy in clinical practice, by including a variety of wounds and using standard sampling and culture procedures. Swabs (Levine technique) and biopsies were taken for microbiological culture in a standardized manner from the same location of one wound for each patient. Statistical analyses were performed to determine overall agreement, and observed agreement and kappa for specific microorganisms. A variety of wounds of 180 patients from different healthcare facilities in The Netherlands were included. Skin flora was more frequently cultured from swabs, resulting in similar recovery rates when excluding skin flora (1.34 vs 1.35). Swabs were able to identify all microorganisms cultured from biopsies in 131 wounds (72.8%) wounds. Most frequently identified organisms were Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and beta-haemolytic streptococci species. Observed agreement and kappa for these organisms varied between 87.2 and 97.8% and 0.73 and 0.85, respectively. This study demonstrates that swabs and biopsies tend to yield the same culture results when taken from the same location. For frequently occurring microorganisms, agreement between the two methods was even higher. Therefore, there seems to be no direct need for invasive biopsy in clinical practice.

Feasibility of collecting wound fluid during ongoing negative pressure wound therapy by the use of an additional container – A prospective observational study

“…Eight patients stated that they smoked and 11 patients were diagnosed for diabetes mellitus. Eighteen patients received antibiotics, adjusted according to an antibiogram at time point of inclusion, in median (IQR) 6 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 days.…”

“…In clinical practice, different methods are common: clinical judgement and interpreting signs and symptoms of infections, described by Cutting and Harding 1994, 4 wound swabs by using the Levine technique 5 and the considered “gold standard” tissue biopsies, both taken for microbiological culture. 6 , 7 , 8 In the case of an infected chronic wound, the decision to choose the optimal wound dressings is still challenging for clinicians. Further, it leads to the demand for an optimal wound dressing material that is efficient and easy to handle in acute and chronic wounds, effective and economical.…”

Biofilm and Equine Limb Wounds

“…Biopsies are considered the gold standard for microbial diagnostics in wounds [100,102] and should be used for sequencing, PCR, and/or culture to get an overview of the different bacteria present in a given wound. If it is not possible to obtain a biopsy, swabs can in many cases also reveal relevant information when performed and handled correctly [12,101,133]. Treatment should be focused on repeated debridement in combination with topical application of antimicrobial therapies.…”

Therapeutic effect of continuous diffusion of oxygen therapy combined with traditional moist wound dressing therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers

“…The patients wore therapeutic footwear or custom-made footwear, insoles, or toe orthoses to reduce plantar pressure and mitigate or stop the development of foot ulcers [10]. Secretions from DFUs were collected for bacterial culture and antibiotic sensitivity tests [11]. Patients were empirically treated with antibiotics before the susceptibility test results were available.…”