{"title":"三个实验室对犬脓皮病的标准需氧细菌培养及敏感性分析。","authors":"S Zebley, I Spiegel, Z Zhou, S Sanchez","doi":"10.1111/jsap.70018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the reported bacteria and antibiotic sensitivities of aerobic bacterial cultures taken from the same lesion and submitted to three different laboratories. The second objective was to evaluate the clinical significance of the results.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Three cultures were collected simultaneously from the same lesion (crusts, collarettes or pustules). They were submitted to three laboratories, and the results were analysed. The cultured bacteria and reported sensitivities were compared across the laboratories. Fifteen dogs were included in the study (8 male neutered, 7 female spayed), with an age range of 2 to 17 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 3/14 dogs had total agreement with the bacteria species grown across laboratories; however, the same staphylococcus species was grown in 12/14 dogs. Sensitivity agreement between laboratories was calculated using Cohen's kappa and Fleiss' kappa coefficient when the same bacteria were reported. There was almost perfect agreement of the sensitivity results. Four antibiotics were more likely to have disagreement: gentamicin (40%), doxycycline (26.6%), enrofloxacin (26.6%) and clindamycin (13%).</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Staphylococcus species and their sensitivities were reliable and reproducible, which agree with recent studies; however, the additional bacteria reported varied considerably, which may lead to the choice of a broader spectrum antibiotic. To ensure appropriate antibiotic stewardship, all culture results should be compared to cytology results and interpreted with an understanding of the causes of canine pyoderma; any discrepancies should encourage consultation with a microbiologist.</p>","PeriodicalId":17062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Small Animal Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of standard aerobic bacterial culture and sensitivity results from three laboratories for canine pyoderma.\",\"authors\":\"S Zebley, I Spiegel, Z Zhou, S Sanchez\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jsap.70018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the reported bacteria and antibiotic sensitivities of aerobic bacterial cultures taken from the same lesion and submitted to three different laboratories. The second objective was to evaluate the clinical significance of the results.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Three cultures were collected simultaneously from the same lesion (crusts, collarettes or pustules). They were submitted to three laboratories, and the results were analysed. The cultured bacteria and reported sensitivities were compared across the laboratories. Fifteen dogs were included in the study (8 male neutered, 7 female spayed), with an age range of 2 to 17 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 3/14 dogs had total agreement with the bacteria species grown across laboratories; however, the same staphylococcus species was grown in 12/14 dogs. Sensitivity agreement between laboratories was calculated using Cohen's kappa and Fleiss' kappa coefficient when the same bacteria were reported. There was almost perfect agreement of the sensitivity results. Four antibiotics were more likely to have disagreement: gentamicin (40%), doxycycline (26.6%), enrofloxacin (26.6%) and clindamycin (13%).</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Staphylococcus species and their sensitivities were reliable and reproducible, which agree with recent studies; however, the additional bacteria reported varied considerably, which may lead to the choice of a broader spectrum antibiotic. To ensure appropriate antibiotic stewardship, all culture results should be compared to cytology results and interpreted with an understanding of the causes of canine pyoderma; any discrepancies should encourage consultation with a microbiologist.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Small Animal Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Small Animal Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jsap.70018\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Small Animal Practice","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jsap.70018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Analysis of standard aerobic bacterial culture and sensitivity results from three laboratories for canine pyoderma.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reported bacteria and antibiotic sensitivities of aerobic bacterial cultures taken from the same lesion and submitted to three different laboratories. The second objective was to evaluate the clinical significance of the results.
Materials and methods: Three cultures were collected simultaneously from the same lesion (crusts, collarettes or pustules). They were submitted to three laboratories, and the results were analysed. The cultured bacteria and reported sensitivities were compared across the laboratories. Fifteen dogs were included in the study (8 male neutered, 7 female spayed), with an age range of 2 to 17 years.
Results: Only 3/14 dogs had total agreement with the bacteria species grown across laboratories; however, the same staphylococcus species was grown in 12/14 dogs. Sensitivity agreement between laboratories was calculated using Cohen's kappa and Fleiss' kappa coefficient when the same bacteria were reported. There was almost perfect agreement of the sensitivity results. Four antibiotics were more likely to have disagreement: gentamicin (40%), doxycycline (26.6%), enrofloxacin (26.6%) and clindamycin (13%).
Clinical significance: Staphylococcus species and their sensitivities were reliable and reproducible, which agree with recent studies; however, the additional bacteria reported varied considerably, which may lead to the choice of a broader spectrum antibiotic. To ensure appropriate antibiotic stewardship, all culture results should be compared to cytology results and interpreted with an understanding of the causes of canine pyoderma; any discrepancies should encourage consultation with a microbiologist.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Small Animal Practice (JSAP) is a monthly peer-reviewed publication integrating clinical research papers and case reports from international sources, covering all aspects of medicine and surgery relating to dogs, cats and other small animals. These papers facilitate the dissemination and implementation of new ideas and techniques relating to clinical veterinary practice, with the ultimate aim of promoting best practice. JSAP publishes high quality original articles, as well as other scientific and educational information. New developments are placed in perspective, encompassing new concepts and peer commentary. The target audience is veterinarians primarily engaged in the practise of small animal medicine and surgery.
In addition to original articles, JSAP will publish invited editorials (relating to a manuscript in the same issue or a topic of current interest), review articles, which provide in-depth discussion of important clinical issues, and other scientific and educational information from around the world.
The final decision on publication of a manuscript rests with the Editorial Board and ultimately with the Editor. All papers, regardless of type, represent the opinion of the authors and not necessarily that of the Editor, the Association or the Publisher.
The Journal of Small Animal Practice is published on behalf of the British Small Animal Veterinary Association and is also the official scientific journal of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association