Deep tissue biopsy vs. superficial swab culture monitoring in the microbiological assessment of limb-threatening diabetic foot infection

Diabetic foot ulcers in Cameroon: can microflora prevalence inform probabilistic antibiotic treatment?

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical features, regularly associated microorganisms and their susceptibility to antibiotics, and the clinical outcomes of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes at the Yaoundé Central Hospital, Cameroon.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of routinely collected hospital data, and data validation by survey of clinical notes was conducted from November 1999 to October 2002 for adult diabetic patients with foot ulcers. Clinical data were recorded for each patient, followed by a record of microbiological investigations where available.

RESULTS

Of 503 patients with diabetes admitted during the study period, 54 (10.7%) had foot ulcers. Male subject represented 66.7% of this population. The mean age of the study population was 59.66 +/- 1.52 years. The foot ulcer led to the diagnosis of diabetes in six patients in whom the condition was previously unidentified. Of the 54 patients with foot ulcers, nine (16.7%) were selected for surgery and the remaining 45 were managed conservatively. Microbiological investigations were available for 21 patients. Proteus mirabilis was the most frequent microorganism yielded, and was regularly associated with Staphylococcus aureus. All the microorganisms isolated showed high sensitivity to second-generation quinolone antibiotics and were regularly sensitive to aminoglycoside antibiotics. Nine (16.7%) patients died and seven (13%) were discharged at their own request.

CONCLUSION

The mortality rate among our diabetic patients with foot ulcers is high and the combination of second-generation quinolone and aminoglycoside antibiotics can be proposed as a probabilistic antibiotic approach to treating foot infection.

A clinico-microbiological study of diabetic foot ulcers in an Indian tertiary care hospital

OBJECTIVE

To determine the microbiological profile and antibiotic susceptibility patterns of organisms isolated from diabetic foot ulcers. Also, to assess potential risk factors for infection of ulcers with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) and the outcome of these infections.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Pus samples for bacterial culture were collected from 80 patients admitted with diabetic foot infections. All patients had ulcers with Wagner's grade 3-5. Fifty patients (62.5%) had coexisting osteomyelitis. Gram-negative bacilli were tested for extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) production by double disc diffusion method. Staphylococcal isolates were tested for susceptibility to oxacillin by screen agar method, disc diffusion, and mec A-based PCR. Potential risk factors for MDRO-positive samples were explored.

RESULTS

Gram-negative aerobes were most frequently isolated (51.4%), followed by gram-positive aerobes and anaerobes (33.3 and 15.3%, respectively). Seventy-two percent of patients were positive for MDROs. ESBL production and methicillin resistance was noted in 44.7 and 56.0% of bacterial isolates, respectively. MDRO-positive status was associated with presence of neuropathy (P = 0.03), osteomyelitis (P = 0.01), and ulcer size >4 cm(2) (P < 0.001) but not with patient characteristics, ulcer type and duration, or duration of hospital stay. MDRO-infected patients had poor glycemic control (P = 0.01) and had to be surgically treated more often (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Infection with MDROs is common in diabetic foot ulcers and is associated with inadequate glycemic control and increased requirement for surgical treatment. There is a need for continuous surveillance of resistant bacteria to provide the basis for empirical therapy and reduce the risk of complications.

Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 1. Foot infections in patients with diabetes cause substantial morbidity and frequent visits to health care professionals and may lead to amputation of a lower extremity. 2. Diabetic foot infections require attention to local (foot) and systemic (metabolic) issues and coordinated management, preferably by a multidisciplinary foot-care team (A-II). The team managing these infections should include, or have ready access to, an infectious diseases specialist or a medical microbiologist (B-II). 3. The major predisposing factor to these infections is foot ulceration, which is usually related to peripheral neuropathy. Peripheral vascular disease and various immunological disturbances play a secondary role. 4. Aerobic Gram-positive cocci (especially Staphylococcus aureus) are the predominant pathogens in diabetic foot infections. Patients who have chronic wounds or who have recently received antibiotic therapy may also be infected with Gram-negative rods, and those with foot ischemia or gangrene may have obligate anaerobic pathogens. 5. Wound infections must be diagnosed clinically on the basis of local (and occasionally systemic) signs and symptoms of inflammation. Laboratory (including microbiological) investigations are of limited use for diagnosing infection, except in cases of osteomyelitis (B-II). 6. Send appropriately obtained specimens for culture before starting empirical antibiotic therapy in all cases of infection, except perhaps those that are mild and previously untreated (B-III). Tissue specimens obtained by biopsy, ulcer curettage, or aspiration are preferable to wound swab specimens (A-I). 7. Imaging studies may help diagnose or better define deep, soft-tissue purulent collections and are usually needed to detect pathological findings in bone. Plain radiography may be adequate in many cases, but MRI (in preference to isotope scanning) is more sensitive and specific, especially for detection of soft-tissue lesions (A-I). 8. Infections should be categorized by their severity on the basis of readily assessable clinical and laboratory features (B-II). Most important among these are the specific tissues involved, the adequacy of arterial perfusion, and the presence of systemic toxicity or metabolic instability. Categorization helps determine the degree of risk to the patient and the limb and, thus, the urgency and venue of management. 9. Available evidence does not support treating clinically uninfected ulcers with antibiotic therapy (D-III). Antibiotic therapy is necessary for virtually all infected wounds, but it is often insufficient without appropriate wound care. 10. Select an empirical antibiotic regimen on the basis of the severity of the infection and the likely etiologic agent(s) (B-II). Therapy aimed solely at aerobic Gram-positive cocci may be sufficient for mild-to-moderate infections in patients who have not recently received antibiotic therapy (A-II). Broad-spectrum empirical therapy is not routinely required but is indicated for severe infections, pending culture results and antibiotic susceptibility data (B-III). Take into consideration any recent antibiotic therapy and local antibiotic susceptibility data, especially the prevalence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or other resistant organisms. Definitive therapy should be based on both the culture results and susceptibility data and the clinical response to the empirical regimen (C-III). 11. There is only limited evidence with which to make informed choices among the various topical, oral, and parenteral antibiotic agents. Virtually all severe and some moderate infections require parenteral therapy, at least initially (C-III). Highly bioavailable oral antibiotics can be used in most mild and in many moderate infections, including some cases of osteomyelitis (A-II). Topical therapy may be used for some mild superficial infections (B-I). 12. Continue antibiotic therapy until there is evidence that the infection has resolved but not necessarily until a wound has healed. Suggestions for the duration of antibiotic therapy are as follows: for mild infections, 12 weeks usually suffices, but some require an additional 12 weeks; for moderate and severe infections, usually 24 weeks is sufficient, depending on the structures involved, the adequacy of debridement, the type of soft-tissue wound cover, and wound vascularity (A-II); and for osteomyelitis, generally at least 46 weeks is required, but a shorter duration is sufficient if the entire infected bone is removed, and probably a longer duration is needed if infected bone remains (B-II). 13. If an infection in a clinically stable patient fails to respond to 1 antibiotic courses, consider discontinuing all antimicrobials and, after a few days, obtaining optimal culture specimens (C-III). 14. Seek surgical consultation and, when needed, intervention for infections accompanied by a deep abscess, extensive bone or joint involvement, crepitus, substantial necrosis or gangrene, or necrotizing fasciitis (A-II). Evaluating the limb's arterial supply and revascularizing when indicated are particularly important. Surgeons with experience and interest in the field should be recruited by the foot-care team, if possible. 15. Providing optimal wound care, in addition to appropriate antibiotic treatment of the infection, is crucial for healing (A-I). This includes proper wound cleansing, debridement of any callus and necrotic tissue, and, especially, off-loading of pressure. There is insufficient evidence to recommend use of a specific wound dressing or any type of wound healing agents or products for infected foot wounds. 16. Patients with infected wounds require early and careful follow-up observation to ensure that the selected medical and surgical treatment regimens have been appropriate and effective (B-III). 17. Studies have not adequately defined the role of most adjunctive therapies for diabetic foot infections, but systematic reviews suggest that granulocyte colony-stimulating factors and systemic hyperbaric oxygen therapy may help prevent amputations (B-I). These treatments may be useful for severe infections or for those that have not adequately responded to therapy, despite correcting for all amenable local and systemic adverse factors. 18. Spread of infection to bone (osteitis or osteomyelitis) may be difficult to distinguish from noninfectious osteoarthropathy. Clinical examination and imaging tests may suffice, but bone biopsy is valuable for establishing the diagnosis of osteomyelitis, for defining the pathogenic organism(s), and for determining the antibiotic susceptibilities of such organisms (B-II). 19. Although this field has matured, further research is much needed. The committee especially recommends that adequately powered prospective studies be undertaken to elucidate and validate systems for classifying infection, diagnosing osteomyelitis, defining optimal antibiotic regimens in various situations, and clarifying the role of surgery in treating osteomyelitis (A-III).

Diabetic foot infections: stepwise medical and surgical management

Foot complications are common among diabetic patients; foot ulcers are among the more serious consequences. These ulcers frequently become infected, with potentially disastrous progression to deeper spaces and tissues. If not treated promptly and appropriately, diabetic foot infections can become incurable or even lead to septic gangrene, which may require foot amputation. Diagnosing infection in a diabetic foot ulcer is based on clinical signs and symptoms of inflammation. Properly culturing an infected lesion can disclose the pathogens and provide their antibiotic susceptibilities. Specimens for culture should be obtained after wound debridement to avoid contamination and optimise identification of pathogens. Staphylococcus aureus is the most common isolate in these infections; the increasing incidence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus over the past two decades has further complicated antibiotic treatment. While chronic infections are often polymicrobial, many acute infections in patients not previously treated with antibiotics are caused by a single pathogen, usually a gram-positive coccus. We offer a stepwise approach to treating diabetic foot infections. Most patients must first be medically stabilised and any metabolic aberrations should be addressed. Antibiotic therapy is not required for uninfected wounds but should be carefully selected for all infected lesions. Initial therapy is usually empirical but may be modified according to the culture and sensitivity results and the patient's clinical response. Surgical intervention is usually required in cases of retained purulence or advancing infection despite optimal medical therapy. Possible additional indications for surgical procedures include incision and drainage of an abscess, debridement of necrotic material, removal of any foreign bodies, arterial revascularisation and, when needed, amputation. Most foot ulcers occur on the plantar surface of the foot, thus requiring a plantar incision for any drainage procedure.

Evidence-Based Protocol for Diabetic Foot Ulcers

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot ulcers are the single biggest risk factor for nontraumatic foot amputations in persons with diabetes. Foot ulcers occur in 12 to 25 percent of persons with diabetes and precede 84 percent of all nontraumatic amputations in this growing population. Because of the high incidence of foot ulcers, amputations remain a source of morbidity and mortality in persons with diabetes. Strict adherence to evidence-based protocols as described herein will prevent the majority of these amputations.

METHODS

The collective experience of treating patients with neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers in four major diabetic foot programs in the United States and Europe was analyzed.

RESULTS

The following protocol was developed for patients with diabetic foot ulcers: (1) establishment of good communication among the patient, the wound healing team, and the primary medical doctor; (2) comprehensive, protocol-driven care of the entire patient, including hemoglobin A1c, microalbuminuria, and cholesterol as well as early treatment of retinopathy, nephropathy, and cardiac disease; (3) weekly objective measurement of the wound with digital photography, planimetry, and documentation of the wound-healing process using the Wound Electronic Medical Record, if available; (4) objective evaluation of blood flow in the lower extremities (e.g., noninvasive flow studies); (5) débridement of hyperkeratotic, infected, and nonviable tissue; (6) use of systemic antibiotics for deep infection, drainage, and cellulitis; (7) off-loading; (8) maintenance of a moist wound bed; (9) use of growth factor and/or cellular therapy if the wound is not healing after 3 weeks with this protocol; and (10) consideration of the use of vacuum-assisted therapy in complex wounds.

CONCLUSIONS

In diabetic foot ulcers, availability of the above modalities, in combination with early recognition and comprehensive treatment, ensures rapid healing, minimizes morbidity and mortality rates, and eliminates toe and limb amputations in the absence of ischemia and osteomyelitis.

Venous ulcers

Veneous ulcers are extremely common, accounting for a large proportin of all lower extremity ulcers. Due to their chronicity and relatively high prevalence, their impact on the cost of healthcare and the lives of the patients affected is quite significant. There has been progress in understanding the pathophysiology, clinical features, and diagnosis of these ulcers, but the basic principles of care have remained consistent for almost a half century. To allow for optimal healing, it is important to maintain a clean moist wound bed, treat any clinically significant infection, and decrease surrounding edema.

[Improving microbiological diagnostics in septic orthopaedic surgery. Comparative study of patients receiving systemic antibiotic therapy]

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective study included 63 patients with confirmed infections of soft tissue, joints, bones or implants. During 110 surgical interventions, 124 swab and deep tissue sample pairs were taken and analysed microbiologically using standard procedures.

RESULTS

In 40 patients who had not received prior antibiotic treatment, 57 sample pairs (swabs/tissue) were taken. In 70%, growth of microorganisms could be observed in both swabs and tissue samples. Growth in tissue sample only was observed in 14% and in 14% no growth could be detected. In 67 sample pairs taken from 23 patients who had received systemic antimicrobial treatment prior to surgery, microbial growth in both specimens was detected in 40%. Growth in tissue sample only was observed in 22% and 34% of the samples remained without detectable growth. The overall sensitivity of the tissue samples (70%) was significantly higher than in swab samples (44%) for the pretreated group.

CONCLUSION

The use of intraoperative tissue samples for microbiological diagnostics in septic orthopaedic surgery must be considered a "gold standard". The higher sensitivity of intraoperative tissue samples is particularly important in patients receiving systemic antibiotic therapy prior to surgical interventions.

The role of swab and tissue culture in the diagnosis of implantable cardiac device infection

BACKGROUND

The isolation of a pathogen is vital in the diagnosis and treatment of a device infection. A swab culture, despite poor sensitivity, is the most common method used in specimen collection.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative value of swab and tissue specimen cultures in patients with implantable cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators.

DESIGN

Prospective patient cohort study.

SETTING

A 1,000-bed tertiary referral center in Cleveland, Ohio.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with implantable cardiac pacemaker or defibrillator presenting for lead extraction from October 1, 2000 to March 31, 2001.

METHODS

Tissue and swab cultures were prospectively collected during pacemaker and implantable defibrillator surgeries that required lead extraction. Clinical manifestations, microbiology, and echocardiographic data were recorded in patients with and without a clinical diagnosis of device system infection.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients with implantable pacemaker (n = 49, 69%), implantable defibrillator (n = 18, 25%), or both devices (n = 4, 6%) requiring lead extraction had pocket swab and tissue cultures for analysis. Infection was evident clinically in 35 (49%) of the patients and absent in the remainder. The most common bacteria isolated were coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (37%) and Staphylococcus aureus (10%). Patients with clinical infection had positive cultures more frequently (P = 0.002) by pocket tissue culture (n = 24, 69%) than by swab culture (n = 11, 31%). However, patients without clinical infections had positive cultures at similar rates by pocket tissue culture (n = 10, 28%) and by swab culture (n = 8, 22%; P = 0.48). Patients without clinical infection were not treated with other than perioperative antibiotics, and did not develop clinical infections.

CONCLUSION

Pocket tissue cultures are more effective than pocket swab cultures for the isolation and identification of the infectious pathogens in cardiac device infections. Positive cultures by pocket swab or tissue cultures in the absence of clinical signs and symptoms of infection does not imply infection or the need for specific therapy.

Analysis of skin-graft loss due to infection: infection-related graft loss

This prospective study was performed to analyze the causes of infection-related skin-graft loss in a general population of plastic and reconstructive surgery patients. One hundred thirty-two patients who received either full- or split-thickness skin grafts to reconstruct soft-tissue defects were included. The tissue defects were grouped according to the cause as follows: vascular ulcers (9.2%), burns (14.5%), traumatic tissue defects (36.6%), and flap donor-site defects (39.7%). In all cases, the preoperative evaluation indicated an adequate wound-bed preparation. However, graft loss secondary to infection was recorded in 31 patients (23.5%). The microbiological cultures revealed Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 58.1% of the cases (P<0.05), followed by Staphylococcus aureus, Enterobacter, enterococci, and Acinetobacter; 58.3% of grafts in vascular ulcers, 47.4% of grafts in burns, 16.7% of grafts in traumatic-tissue defects; and 13.5% of grafts in donor-site defects were lost due to infection. Vascular ulcers and burns were more commonly associated with graft losses due to infection than other tissue defects (P<0.001). No correlation was found between the etiological cause of the defects and the microorganisms cultured. However, Pseudomonas infections were more fulminant and caused an increased reoperation rate 4.2 times (P<0.05). Full-thickness grafts were more resistant to infection than split-thickness grafts (P<0.05). Graft loss due to infection was also more common in grafts applied to the lower extremities or when performed at multiple sites. In conclusion, 23.7% of skin grafts were lost due to infection in a group of general plastic surgery patients. Infection-related graft loss was more commonly encountered in vascular ulcers and burn wounds, and the most common cause was Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Comparison of microbiological results of needle puncture vs. superficial swab in infected diabetic foot ulcer with osteomyelitis

AIM

To study prospectively two methods for the bacteriological diagnosis of osteomyelitis related to diabetic foot ulcer: needle puncture performed across normal skin surrounding the foot ulcer and superficial swabbing of the ulcer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Diabetic patients with a foot ulcer complicated by bone or joint infection, as detected by X-ray imaging, were included in the study. Ulcer swabbing and needle puncture were performed in each patient. To reach the tissue nearest the bone surface, needle puncture was guided by X-ray imaging and the drop of fluid obtained by aspiration was used for both aerobic and anaerobic bacterial culture.

RESULTS

Twenty-one diabetic patients were included. The mean number of microorganisms isolated by needle puncture was significantly lower compared with that obtained by superficial swabbing: 1.09 vs. 2.04 (P < 0.02). Three bacterial species were isolated by needle puncture only in one patient while three or more bacterial isolates were obtained by superficial swabbing in six patients. No bacterial isolate was detected in five patients by needle puncture and in two patients by superficial swabbing. Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 70% of cases (seven patients) when a single bacterial species was obtained by needle puncture. After needle puncture, no wound complication or infection was observed.

CONCLUSION

Culture of samples obtained by needle puncture revealed one or two bacterial isolates in two-thirds of diabetic patients with osteomyelitis following foot ulcer. Given the lack of complications, this invasive diagnostic technique should be considered for deep direct sampling in diabetic patients with osteomyelitis related to foot ulcer when surgical debridement is contraindicated or delayed.

Diabetic Foot Ulcers

When treating diabetic foot ulcers it is important to be aware of the natural history of the diabetic foot, which can be divided into five stages: stage 1, a normal foot; stage 2, a high risk foot; stage 3, an ulcerated foot; stage 4, an infected foot; and stage 5, a necrotic foot. This covers the entire spectrum of foot disease but emphasises the development of the foot ulcer as a pivotal event in stage 3, which demands urgent and aggressive management. Diabetic foot care in all stages needs multidisciplinary management to control mechanical, wound, microbiological, vascular, metabolic and educational aspects. Achieving good metabolic control of blood glucose, lipids and blood pressure is important in each stage, as is education to teach proper foot care appropriate for each stage. Ideally, it is important to prevent the development of ulcers in stages 1 and 2. In stage 1, the normal foot, it is important to encourage the use of suitable footwear, and to educate the patient to promote healthy foot care and footwear habits. In stage 2, the foot has developed one or more of the following risk factors for ulceration: neuropathy, ischaemia, deformity, swelling and callus. The majority of deformities can be accommodated in special footwear and as callus is an important precursor of ulceration it should be treated aggressively, especially in the neuropathic foot. In stage 3, ulcers can be divided into two distinct entities: those in the neuropathic foot and those in the neuroischaemic foot. In the neuropathic foot, ulcers commonly develop on the plantar surface of the foot and the toes, and are associated with neglected callus and high plantar pressures. In the neuroischaemic foot, ulcers are commonly seen around the edges of the foot, including the apices of the toes and back of the heel, and are associated with trauma or wearing unsuitable shoes. Ulcers in stage 3 need relief of pressure (mechanical control), sharp debridement and dressings (wound control), and neuroischaemic foot ulcers may need vascular intervention (vascular control). In stage 4, microbiological control is crucial and severe infections need intravenous antibacterial therapy, and urgent assessment of the need for surgical drainage and debridement. Without urgent treatment, severe infections will progress to necrosis. In stage 5, necrosis can be divided into wet and dry necrosis. Wet necrosis in neuropathic feet requires intravenous antibacterials and surgical debridement, and wet necrosis in neuroischaemic feet also needs vascular reconstruction. Aggressive management of diabetic foot ulceration will reduce the number of feet proceeding to infection and necrosis, and thus reduce the number of major amputations in diabetic patients.

Culture of Percutaneous Bone Biopsy Specimens For Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: Concordance With Ulcer Swab Cultures

BACKGROUND

We assessed the diagnostic value of swab cultures by comparing them with corresponding cultures of percutaneous bone biopsy specimens for patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

METHODS

The medical charts of patients with foot osteomyelitis who underwent a surgical percutaneous bone biopsy between January 1996 and June 2004 in a single diabetic foot clinic were reviewed. Seventy-six patients with 81 episodes of foot osteomyelitis who had positive results of culture of bone biopsy specimens and who had received no antibiotic therapy for at least 4 weeks before biopsy constituted the study population.

RESULTS

Pathogens isolated from bone samples were predominantly staphylococci (52%) and gram-negative bacilli (18.4%). The distributions of microorganisms in bone and swab cultures were similar, except for coagulase-negative staphylococci, which were more prevalent in bone samples (P < .001). The results for cultures of concomitant foot ulcer swabs were available for 69 of 76 patients. The results of bone and swab cultures were identical for 12 (17.4%) of 69 patients, and bone bacteria were isolated from the corresponding swab culture in 21 (30.4%) of 69 patients. The concordance between the results of cultures of swab and of bone biopsy specimens was 42.8% for Staphylococcus aureus, 28.5% for gram-negative bacilli, and 25.8% for streptococci. The overall concordance for all isolates was 22.5%. No adverse events--such as worsening peripheral vascular disease, fracture, or biopsy-induced bone infection--were observed, but 1 patient experienced an episode of acute Charcot osteoarthropathy 4 weeks after bone biopsy was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that superficial swab cultures do not reliably identify bone bacteria. Percutaneous bone biopsy seems to be safe for patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

A systematic approach to diabetic foot infections

Foot infection is the most common reason for hospitalization and subsequent lower extremity amputation among persons with diabetes. Foot ulceration caused by diabetic neuropathy, trauma, and peripheral vascular disease can lead to a limbor life-threatening infection. The optimum treatment of these potentially devastating conditions depends on a multidisciplinary approach that addresses the related or underlying disorders and thus ensures proper wound healing and a positive outcome. In addition to antibiotic therapy, severe soft-tissue or bone infections may necessitate surgical treatment, including drainage, débridement, and vascular reconstruction. Initial (empiric) antibiotic therapy should provide coverage against staphylococci and streptococci and should be revised according culture results. Antibiotic therapy is not indicated in clinically noninfected wounds. The duration of antibiotic treatment can range from 1 week for mild infections to 6 weeks or more for residual osteomyelitis and severe deep tissue infections. Aggressive (and sometimes repeated or staged) surgical intervention and appropriate antibiotic therapy can reduce the likelihood of a major amputation and the duration of hospitalization.

The antimicrobial activity of maggots: in-vivo results

In the literature maggot therapy is discussed as a promising and potent form of debridement therapy. The number of maggots needed to debride a wound is estimated at 10 per cm2, and more in case of a higher percentage of necrosis or slough. In the authors' hospital, from March 1999 to May 2002, 16 patients were successfully treated with maggot therapy. The average maggot treatment time was 27 days, with an average of seven maggot changes. Most patients were treated for osteomyelitis, with trauma being the leading aetiological factor. In accordance with in-vitro findings, maggot therapy was found to be more effective in gram-positive infected wounds. Gram-negative bacteria are cultured more often after maggot treatment than before it (p=0.001). The opposite effect was found for gram-positive infected wounds (non-significant p=0.07). In vivo maggots seem to be less effective against gram-negative infected wounds. The authors believe that a higher number of maggots is needed not only for a larger wound or a wound with a higher percentage covered with slough, but also for a wound infected with gram-negative bacteria.

Optimal treatment of infected diabetic foot ulcers

Foot ulceration can lead to devastating consequences in diabetic patients. They are not only associated with increased morbidity but also mortality. Foot infections result as a consequence of foot ulceration, which can occasionally lead to deep tissue infections and osteomyelitis; both of which can result in loss of limb. To prevent amputations prompt diagnosis and treatment is required. Understanding the pathology of the diabetic foot will help in the planning of appropriate investigations and treatment. Clinical diagnosis of infection is based on the presence of discharge from the ulcer, cellulitis, warmth and signs of toxicity; though the latter is uncommon. Deep tissue samples from the ulcer and/or blood cultures should be taken before, but without delaying the start of antibacterial treatment in limb and life-threatening infections. In milder infections wound sampling may direct appropriate antibacterial treatment. Staphylococcus aureus, followed by streptococci are the most common organisms causing infection and antibacterial treatment should be targeted against these organisms in mild infection possibly with monotherapy. But in serious infections combination therapy is required because these are usually caused by multiple organisms including anaerobes. Drug-resistant organisms are becoming more prevalent and methicillin-resistant infections can be treated effectively with a number of oral antibacterials either as monotherapy or in combination. Surgical treatment with debridement, for example, callus removal or drainage of pus form an important part of diabetic foot ulcer management especially in the presence of infection. Occasionally limited surgery including dead infected bone removal may be necessary for resolution of infection. Amputation is sometimes required as a last resort for limb or life preservation.

Swab cultures accurately identify bacterial pathogens in diabetic foot wounds not involving bone

AIMS

Current clinical practice assumes swab cultures from wounds are unreliable. However, this assumption is based upon data culled only from wounds in which osteomyelitis and/or gangrene were present. This study aimed to re-evaluate the accuracy of swab cultures vs. deep tissue cultures in diabetic wounds of varying depth and severity.

METHODS

A total of 60 infected diabetic foot wounds were cultured. Two specimens were taken from each wound: superficial swab before debridement and deep tissue specimen towards the end of surgical debridement.

RESULTS

In 37 wounds (62%), the micro-organisms isolated from the swab specimen and those isolated from the deep tissue specimen were identical. In another 12 wounds (20%), the swab culture contained all micro-organisms isolated from the deep tissue culture, but also contained additional micro-organisms. Analysis according to the depth of the wound, demonstrated that swabs identified all micro-organisms isolated from the deep tissue specimens in 36/40 wounds (90%) that did not extend to bone as opposed to 13/20 wounds (65%) that extended to bone.

CONCLUSIONS

Swab cultures are valuable in identifying pathogens in diabetic foot wounds when bone is not involved. When surgical debridement is contraindicated or delayed, swab cultures can be used to select appropriate antibiotic therapy.

Diabetic foot ulcer and multidrug-resistant organisms: risk factors and impact

AIMS

The primary objective was to characterize factors allowing the colonization of diabetic foot wounds by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO), and the secondary objective was to evaluate the influence of MDRO colonization/infection on wound healing.

METHODS

In 180 patients admitted to a specialized diabetic foot unit, microbiological specimens were taken on admission. Potential risk factors for MDRO-positive specimens were examined using univariate and multivariate analyses. Prospective follow-up data from 75 patients were used to evaluate the influence of MDRO colonization/infection on time to healing.

RESULTS

Eighteen per cent of admission specimens were positive for MDRO. MDRO-positive status was not associated with patient characteristics (age, sex, type of diabetes, complications of diabetes), wound duration, or wound type (neuropathic or ischaemic). In the multivariate analysis, the only factors significantly associated with positive MDRO status on admission were a history of previous hospitalization for the same wound (21/32 compared with 48/148; P = 0.0008) or the presence of osteomyelitis (22/32 compared with 71/148; P = 0.025). In the longitudinal study of 75 wounds, MDRO-positive status on admission or during follow-up (6 months at least or until healing, mean 9 +/- 7 months) was not associated with time to healing (P = 0.71).

CONCLUSION

MDROs are often present in severe diabetic foot wounds. About one-third of patients with a history of previous hospitalization for the same wound, and 25% of patients with osteomyelitis, had MDRO-positive specimens. This suggests that hygiene measures, or isolation precautions in the case of admission of patients presenting with these characteristics, should be aggressively implemented to prevent cross-transmission. Positive MDRO status is not associated with a longer time to healing.

Advances in the treatment of diabetic foot infections

Lower extremity infections are frequent causes of substantial morbidity and mortality in the diabetic population, and these infections consume a large portion of resources expended on diabetic complications. Gram-positive cocci, particularly Staphylococcus aureus, are the most important pathogens in diabetic foot infections. These organisms are predominant both in mild infections (which are often monomicrobial), as well as in more severe and chronic infected wounds that more often have a polymicrobial cause. Appropriate clinical assessment and culturing of infections are critical in establishing the presence and severity of infection, in detecting osteomyelitis, and in directing the optimal treatment approach. Following necessary debridement and other surgical interventions (e.g., bone resection, revascularization), appropriate antibiotic therapy is a cornerstone of managing the infected lower extremity. Peripheral vascular (i.e., arterial) insufficiency and the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance are primary barriers to successfully managing these infections. Fortunately, alternative delivery systems (e.g., antibiotic beads, impregnated sponges) and novel antibiotics (e.g., levofloxacin, linezolid) are providing possible solutions to the challenges posed by this physically, emotionally, and financially devastating condition.

An evidence-based approach to diabetic foot infections

Foot infections are a major complication of diabetes mellitus and contribute to the development of gangrene and lower extremity amputation. Recent evidence indicates that persons with diabetes are at greater risk for infection because of underlying neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, and impaired responses to infecting organisms. This article reviews the underlying pathophysiology, causes, microbiology, and current management concepts for this potentially limb-threatening complication. Multidisciplinary management consisting of teams of specialists with a focus on limb preservation can make significant improvements in outcomes, including a reduction in rates of lower extremity amputation.

Diabetic foot ulcerations: management and adjunctive therapy

Foot ulcerations, infections, gangrene, and lower extremity amputation are major causes of disability to the patient who has diabetes mellitus, often resulting in significant morbidity, extensive periods of hospitalization, and mortality. Although not all such lesions can be prevented, it is possible to dramatically reduce their incidence through appropriate management and prevention protocols incorporating a multidisciplinary team approach.

Diabetic foot infections and antibiotic therapy

Diabetic foot infections are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates as well as significant financial impact on the health care system. Improved patient outcomes and intelligent use of resources should determine the selection of diagnostic procedures and the therapeutic modalities used. Diabetic patients who develop lower extremity infections require a multidisciplinary approach in the management of their infections and other disorders. Aggressive surgical debridement and appropriate and adequate antibiotic therapy are necessary to successfully treat severe foot infections and permit faster recovery.

Infections in diabetic foot ulcers

Foot ulcers and infections are common in diabetic patients. A 30-month-long descriptive study was conducted in our hospital in which we analyzed microbiological isolates of all patients admitted with diabetic foot infections. The predominant flora identified were Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, followed by Enterococcus spp., Streptococcus spp., and enterobacteriaceaes. In 27 positive cultures (42%) polymicrobial flora were found. There were only 5% anaerobic bacteria. There appears to be a relationship between the sample collection system and microbiological isolates.