A retrospective comparison of bone culture techniques.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 Medicine
Jennifer A Kipp, Lindsay K LeSavage, Greg Russell, Kevin P High, Nicholas S Powers, Cody D Blazek
{"title":"A retrospective comparison of bone culture techniques.","authors":"Jennifer A Kipp, Lindsay K LeSavage, Greg Russell, Kevin P High, Nicholas S Powers, Cody D Blazek","doi":"10.1053/j.jfas.2025.08.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The gold standard test for diagnosing osteomyelitis is bone biopsy, and IDSA 2023 guidelines recommend obtaining a \"bone culture\" for microbiological analysis in the setting of osteomyelitis. However, there is no consensus on the optimal method by which to obtain this bone sample.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare two intraoperative methods to obtain bone cultures: bone tissue cultures and bone swab cultures.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A retrospective review was performed on one-hundred three patients who underwent 126 surgical procedures for concern of osteomyelitis in the lower extremity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Intraoperatively, a bone swab culture and a bone tissue culture were obtained following debridement or amputation from the same operative site and submitted for microbiological analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bone swab cultures yielded positive results in 40.5 % (51/126) of procedures, while bone tissue cultures were positive in 32 % (40/126)(p = 0.027). Complete agreement between both methods occurred in 80 % (101/126) cases. In cases of disagreement, bone swab cultures resulted positive more than bone tissue cultures (p = 0.028).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest that the bone swab is more sensitive overall, and surgeons may even consider the use of both bone tissue and swabs for culture.</p>","PeriodicalId":50191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2025.08.010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The gold standard test for diagnosing osteomyelitis is bone biopsy, and IDSA 2023 guidelines recommend obtaining a "bone culture" for microbiological analysis in the setting of osteomyelitis. However, there is no consensus on the optimal method by which to obtain this bone sample.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare two intraoperative methods to obtain bone cultures: bone tissue cultures and bone swab cultures.

Study design: A retrospective review was performed on one-hundred three patients who underwent 126 surgical procedures for concern of osteomyelitis in the lower extremity.

Methods: Intraoperatively, a bone swab culture and a bone tissue culture were obtained following debridement or amputation from the same operative site and submitted for microbiological analysis.

Results: Bone swab cultures yielded positive results in 40.5 % (51/126) of procedures, while bone tissue cultures were positive in 32 % (40/126)(p = 0.027). Complete agreement between both methods occurred in 80 % (101/126) cases. In cases of disagreement, bone swab cultures resulted positive more than bone tissue cultures (p = 0.028).

Conclusion: These findings suggest that the bone swab is more sensitive overall, and surgeons may even consider the use of both bone tissue and swabs for culture.

骨培养技术的回顾性比较。
背景:诊断骨髓炎的金标准测试是骨活检,IDSA 2023指南建议在骨髓炎的情况下进行“骨培养”进行微生物分析。然而,对于获得该骨样本的最佳方法尚无共识。目的:本研究的目的是回顾性比较两种术中获得骨培养的方法:骨组织培养和骨拭子培养。研究设计:本研究对103例因骨髓炎而接受126次手术的患者进行回顾性研究。方法:在同一手术部位清创或截肢后进行骨拭子培养和骨组织培养,并进行微生物学分析。结果:40.5%(51/126)的骨拭子培养为阳性,32%(40/126)的骨组织培养为阳性(p=0.027)。80%(101/126)病例两种方法完全吻合。在不一致的情况下,骨拭子培养比骨组织培养阳性(p=0.028)。结论:这些发现表明骨拭子总体上更敏感,外科医生甚至可以考虑同时使用骨组织和拭子进行培养。临床证据等级:3。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
234
审稿时长
29.8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery is the leading source for original, clinically-focused articles on the surgical and medical management of the foot and ankle. Each bi-monthly, peer-reviewed issue addresses relevant topics to the profession, such as: adult reconstruction of the forefoot; adult reconstruction of the hindfoot and ankle; diabetes; medicine/rheumatology; pediatrics; research; sports medicine; trauma; and tumors.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信