Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Wound Repair and Reg...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Article . 2017 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Effect of semiquantitative culture results from complex host surgical wounds on dehiscence rates

Authors: Tammer Elmarsafi; Caitlin S. Garwood; John S. Steinberg; Karen K. Evans; Christopher E. Attinger; Paul J. Kim;

Effect of semiquantitative culture results from complex host surgical wounds on dehiscence rates

Abstract

AbstractThe primary aim of this study was to determine the effect of positive bacterial cultures at the time of closure on dehiscence rates. Pre‐ and post‐débridement wound cultures from patients undergoing serial surgical débridement of infected wounds were compared with outcomes 30 days postoperatively. One‐hundred patients were enrolled; 35 were excluded for incomplete culture data. Sixty‐five patients were evaluated for species counts, including Coagulase negative Staphylococcus (CoNS), and semiquantitative culture data for each débridement. The post‐débridement cultures on the date of closure had no growth in 42 patients (64.6%) of which 6 dehisced (14.3%), and 36 remained closed; with no statistically significant difference in dehiscence rates (p = 0.0664). Pre‐débridement cultures from the 1st débridement of the 65 patients showed 8 patients had no growth, 29 grew 1 species, 19 grew 2 species, and 9 had 3–5 species. There was a reduction in the number of species and improvement of semiquantitative cultures with each subsequent débridement. The dehiscence rate for those who had 2 débridements (n = 42) was 21.4% at 30 day follow‐up and 21.7% in those who had 3 débridements (n = 23). The number of débridements had no statistical significance on dehiscence rates. The presence of CoNS on the day of closure was a statistically significant risk for dehiscence within 30 days (p = 0.0091) postoperatively. This data demonstrates: (1) positive post‐débridement cultures (scant/rare, growth in enrichment broth) at the time of closure did not affect overall dehiscence rates (p = 0.0664), (2) the number of species and semiquantitative culture results both improved with each subsequent débridement, (3) the number of surgical débridement did not influence postclosure dehiscence rates. (4) Positive cultures containing CoNS at the time of closure is a risk factor for dehiscence (p = 0.0091).

Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Bacteriological Techniques, Wound Healing, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Middle Aged, Gram-Positive Bacteria, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Culture Media, Debridement, Gram-Negative Bacteria, Surgical Wound Dehiscence, Humans, Surgical Wound Infection, Female, Prospective Studies, Aged, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    7
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
7
Top 10%
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!