The pencil eraser swab technique to quantify Cutibacterium acnes on shoulder skin.

IF 1.8 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Journal of Bone and Joint Infection Pub Date : 2021-12-17 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.5194/jbji-6-451-2021
Vendela M Scheer, Malin Bergman Jungeström, Lena Serrander, Johan H Scheer, Anders Kalén
{"title":"The pencil eraser swab technique to quantify <i>Cutibacterium acnes</i> on shoulder skin.","authors":"Vendela M Scheer, Malin Bergman Jungeström, Lena Serrander, Johan H Scheer, Anders Kalén","doi":"10.5194/jbji-6-451-2021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: <i>Cutibacterium acnes</i> is the most common cause of postoperative infections in orthopaedic shoulder surgery and is hard to eradicate with current measures. Newer strategies focus on reducing bacterial load on the skin before surgery. Several previous studies have used a large number of both described and undescribed sampling techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare three previously described swab techniques to obtain bacterial cultures: Levine's (L) technique, the Z technique and the pencil eraser swab (PES) technique. <b>Methods</b>: Three consecutive skin swabs were collected from the right shoulder, on 15 healthy male volunteers, using Levine's technique, Z technique and PES technique from each participant. To determine the number of living bacteria, serial dilutions were made, and after culturing for 5 d, viable count (VC) was expressed as CFU/mL (with CFU representing colony-forming unit). <b>Results</b>: The PES technique yielded significantly higher VC than the two others. PES: median 3700 CFU/mL, L: 200 CFU/mL and Z: 220 CFU/mL ( <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.003</mn></mrow> </math> ). There was no significant difference between the methods regarding the number of positive cultures. PES: 14/15, L: 11/15 and Z: 12/15. <b>Conclusions</b>: There is a need to harmonise sampling techniques of <i>C. acnes</i> in order to compare the efficacy of different measures to reduce the bacterial load on the skin before and during surgery. Of the three tested methods, the PES technique is simple and produces the highest bacterial counts.</p>","PeriodicalId":15271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8738962/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-6-451-2021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Cutibacterium acnes is the most common cause of postoperative infections in orthopaedic shoulder surgery and is hard to eradicate with current measures. Newer strategies focus on reducing bacterial load on the skin before surgery. Several previous studies have used a large number of both described and undescribed sampling techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare three previously described swab techniques to obtain bacterial cultures: Levine's (L) technique, the Z technique and the pencil eraser swab (PES) technique. Methods: Three consecutive skin swabs were collected from the right shoulder, on 15 healthy male volunteers, using Levine's technique, Z technique and PES technique from each participant. To determine the number of living bacteria, serial dilutions were made, and after culturing for 5 d, viable count (VC) was expressed as CFU/mL (with CFU representing colony-forming unit). Results: The PES technique yielded significantly higher VC than the two others. PES: median 3700 CFU/mL, L: 200 CFU/mL and Z: 220 CFU/mL ( p = 0.003 ). There was no significant difference between the methods regarding the number of positive cultures. PES: 14/15, L: 11/15 and Z: 12/15. Conclusions: There is a need to harmonise sampling techniques of C. acnes in order to compare the efficacy of different measures to reduce the bacterial load on the skin before and during surgery. Of the three tested methods, the PES technique is simple and produces the highest bacterial counts.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用铅笔橡皮拭子技术量化肩部皮肤上的痤疮杆菌。
导言:痤疮丙酸杆菌是肩部骨科手术中最常见的术后感染原因,而且很难通过现有措施根除。新策略的重点是在手术前减少皮肤上的细菌负荷。之前的一些研究使用了大量已描述和未描述的取样技术。本研究的目的是比较之前描述过的三种用于获取细菌培养的拭子技术:Levine(L)技术、Z 技术和铅笔橡皮拭子(PES)技术。研究方法使用 Levine's 技术、Z 技术和 PES 技术从 15 名健康男性志愿者的右肩连续采集三个皮肤拭子。为了确定活细菌的数量,对其进行连续稀释,培养 5 d 后,用 CFU/mL(CFU 代表菌落形成单位)表示活菌计数(VC)。结果:PES 技术产生的 VC 明显高于其他两种技术。PES:中位数为 3700 CFU/mL,L:200 CFU/mL,Z:220 CFU/mL(p = 0.003)。在阳性培养物的数量方面,两种方法之间没有明显差异。PES:14/15,L:11/15,Z:12/15。结论:有必要统一痤疮丙酸杆菌的取样技术,以便比较不同措施在手术前和手术中减少皮肤细菌负荷的效果。在三种测试方法中,PES 技术简单,细菌计数最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Musculoskeletal manifestations of lower-extremity coccidioidomycosis: a case series Emergence of rifampicin-resistant staphylococci on the skin and nose of rifampicin-treated patients with an orthopaedic-device-related infection What is the agreement between principles and practice of antibiotic stewardship in the management of diabetic foot infection: an in-hospital quality control study. It is time for a unified definition of native vertebral osteomyelitis: a framework proposal. Ureaplasma urealyticum osteomyelitis of the greater trochanter in a patient with multiple sclerosis using ocrelizumab – a case report
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1