首页> 外文期刊>Gastroenterology Research >Auditing the Routine Microbiological Examination of Pus Swabs From Uncomplicated Perianal Abscesses: Clinical Necessity or Old Habit?
【24h】

Auditing the Routine Microbiological Examination of Pus Swabs From Uncomplicated Perianal Abscesses: Clinical Necessity or Old Habit?

机译:审计脓液拭子的常规微生物检查从简单的肛门脓肿:临床必要性或旧习惯?

获取原文
           

摘要

Background:Obtaining pus swabs from perianal abscesses after incision and drainage for subsequent microbiological analysis is traditionally performed by general surgeons. Our aim is to assess the current practice in our institution, emphasizing on whether pus swabs were sent or not, as well as to identify any associations between the revealed microbiology and the occurrence of immediate post-operative complications and re-admission rates with fistula-in-ano up to 12 months post the emergency drainage. Finally, we aimed to identify if the any members of the surgical team reviewed at any stage post-operatively the results of the microbiological examination of the obtained pus swabs and if that resulted in changes of the patient management.Methods:We reviewed the operative findings and perioperative antimicrobial management of all patients within our institution that required surgical treatment of perianal abscesses over a 6-week period and re-assessed them after 12 months from the performed drainage, with respect to re-admission and identification of occurred fistula-in-ano.Results:A total of 24 patients met our inclusion criteria. Pus swabs were sent in 66.7% of cases and only a third of the requested microbiology reports were reviewed by a part of the surgical team. All patients were discharged prior to the release of the microbiology results with no subsequent change in the management plan. We did not find any consistent association between the microbiology results and re-admission with perianal abscess, with or without fistula-in-ano.Conclusions:We do not recommend routine use of pus swabs when draining perianal abscesses unless clinical concerns arise, including recurrent perianal sepsis, immuno-compromised status or extensive soft tissue necrosis, especially when these features are associated with systemic sepsis.Copyright 2020, Lalou et al.
机译:背景:在切割和随后的微生物分析引流后,从肛周脓肿获得脓液拭子传统上由普通外科医生进行。我们的宗旨是评估我们机构的目前的实践,强调是否发送了脓液织造拭子,以及识别揭示的微生物学之间的任何关联以及立即发生的术后并发症和与瘘管重新入场费在紧急排水中,最多12个月。最后,我们旨在确定外科小组的任何成员是否在可操作地审查的任何阶段,这些脓液拭子的微生物检查结果以及导致患者管理的变化。方法:我们审查了操作结果在我们机构内所有患者的围手术期抗微生物管理,在6周内需要对肛周脓肿的手术治疗,并在从演出的排水后12个月后重新评估它们,关于再入场和鉴定发生的瘘管 - Ano.Results:共24名患者达到了我们的纳入标准。 PUS拭子被送入66.7%的病例,只有三分之一的外科手术团队审查了所要求的微生物学报告。所有患者均在释放微生物学结果之前出院,而管理计划没有随后的变化。我们没有发现微生物结果与肛周脓肿重新入场之间的任何一致关联,有或没有瘘管 - in-ano.conclusions:除非出现临床担忧,除非出现临床关注肛周败血症,免疫损害状态或广泛的软组织坏死,特别是当这些特征与Systemic Sepsis.copyright 2020相关时,Lalou等人。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号