FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Sequential bacterial sampling of the midline incision in hor...
Equine veterinary journal2018; 51(1); 38-44; doi: 10.1111/evj.12958

Sequential bacterial sampling of the midline incision in horses undergoing exploratory laparotomy.

Abstract: There is limited information about bacterial isolates that are present on the equine midline incision during and following exploratory laparotomy. Objective: To investigate the bacterial species cultured from the ventral midline pre-, intra- and post- laparotomy, whether particular bacterial isolates are associated with the development of surgical site infections (SSIs) and to report the antimicrobial resistance phenotypes of these isolates. Methods: Prospective cohort study. Methods: The ventral midline of 31 horses undergoing exploratory laparotomy was sampled for bacterial culture at set time-points pre, intra and post-operatively. Inclusion criteria were that horses must have undergone exploratory laparotomy within 90 min of the initial colic examination upon hospital admission and must not have been placed in a stable prior to surgery. SSI was defined as any purulent or serous discharge from the laparotomy incision of >24 h duration. Results: Seven horses (22.6%) developed a SSI. None of the variables tested were associated with the altered risk of SSI. The prevalence of a positive bacterial culture from the incision increased progressively over time and a variety of bacteria were isolated. A positive intra-operative culture was not a predictor of SSI; and when a SSI did occur, it was due to a different bacterial isolate. MRSA and ESBL-producers were identified in the post-operative period in one and four different horses respectively, but none of these developed a SSI. Conclusions: Sampling was limited to hospitalisation and no culture results were available for horses developing SSI following hospital discharge. Conclusions: A variety of bacterial species may be isolated from equine laparotomy incisions peri-operatively without development of SSI. SSI does not appear to be solely related to bacterial contamination of the incision peri-operatively and other mechanisms such as bacteraemia merit further investigation.
© 2018 The Authors. Equine Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2018-05-17 PubMed ID: 29679416PubMed Central: PMC6585715DOI: 10.1111/evj.12958Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research investigates the types of bacteria found on the incision site of horses undergoing laparotomy surgery, the correlation of these bacteria with post-operative infections, and the antibiotic resistance of these bacterial isolates. A key finding is that an array of bacteria may be found without leading to infection, and that infection is not solely linked to onsite bacterial contamination.

Study Overview

  • Researchers conducted a prospective study, sampling bacteria present at the incision site of 31 horses undergoing exploratory laparotomy, a surgical procedure in which the abdomen is opened and internal organs examined.
  • Swabs were acquired before, during, and after the procedure, aiming to identify the bacterial species present and their relation to surgical site infections (SSIs).
  • A stringent inclusion criterion was followed. The horses in the study must have had the surgery within 90 minutes after being examined for colic symptoms upon hospital admission and must have not been put in a stable prior to surgery.
  • For this study, SSIs were classified as any instance of purulent (pus-related) or serous (clear, serum-like) discharge from the incision that lasted for more than 24 hours.

Key Findings

  • Of the 31 horses involved in the study, seven (about 22.6%) developed an SSI.
  • No risk factors studied showed a connection to the increased chances of SSIs.
  • Positive bacterial cultures from the incision site grew over time, with different bacterial types recorded. However, having a positive intra-operative culture did not predict the occurrence of SSIs.
  • When an SSI did occur, the study found that the bacteria causing it were not the ones found on the incision site during surgery.
  • In the post-operative period, MRSA and ESBL-producing bacteria were detected in some horses, but these horses did not develop SSIs.

Conclusions and Limitations

  • The researchers highlighted that their sampling was limited to the hospitalisation period of the horses, indicating a gap in knowledge regarding the species of bacteria possibly accumulating after the horses left the hospital.
  • In conclusion, the study showed that the presence of various bacteria on the surgical incision site did not necessarily lead to SSIs.
  • The study suggests that SSIs aren’t solely due to bacterial contamination of the operative area, pointing towards the potential role of other mechanisms (e.g., blood-borne infection or bacteraemia) that warrant further investigation.

Cite This Article

APA
Isgren CM, Salem SE, Townsend NB, Timofte D, Maddox TW, Archer DC. (2018). Sequential bacterial sampling of the midline incision in horses undergoing exploratory laparotomy. Equine Vet J, 51(1), 38-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.12958

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 51
Issue: 1
Pages: 38-44

Researcher Affiliations

Isgren, C M
  • Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
  • Department of Equine Clinical Science, Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
Salem, S E
  • Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
  • Department of Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Zagazig University, Zakazik, Egypt.
Townsend, N B
  • Three Counties Equine Hospital, Stratford Bridge, Ripple, Tewkesbury, UK.
Timofte, D
  • Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
  • Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
Maddox, T W
  • Department of Musculoskeletal Biology, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
Archer, D C
  • Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.
  • Department of Equine Clinical Science, Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, UK.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Bacteria / classification
  • Bacteria / drug effects
  • Bacteria / isolation & purification
  • Bacterial Infections / epidemiology
  • Bacterial Infections / microbiology
  • Bacterial Infections / veterinary
  • Bacterial Load / veterinary
  • Bandages / veterinary
  • Cohort Studies
  • Drug Resistance, Bacterial
  • England / epidemiology
  • Horse Diseases / epidemiology
  • Horse Diseases / microbiology
  • Horses
  • Laparotomy / veterinary
  • Perioperative Period / veterinary
  • Phenotype
  • Prevalence
  • Prospective Studies
  • Surgical Wound / microbiology
  • Surgical Wound / veterinary
  • Surgical Wound Infection / epidemiology
  • Surgical Wound Infection / microbiology
  • Surgical Wound Infection / veterinary
  • Surveys and Questionnaires

Grant Funding

  • University of Liverpool
  • Veterinary Research Project Support

References

This article includes 43 references
  1. Hardy J, Rakestraw PC. Care, complications and reoperation. In: Equine Surgery, 4th edn., Eds: Auer J. and Stick J., Elsevier, Philadelphia: pp 514–529.
  2. Mair TS, Smith LJ. Survival and complication rates in 300 horses undergoing surgical treatment of colic. Part 2: short‐term complications. Equine Vet. J. 37, 303–309.
    pubmed: 16028617
  3. French NP, Smith J, Edwards GB, Proudman CJ. Equine surgical colic: risk factors for postoperative complications. Equine Vet. J. 34, 444–449.
    pubmed: 12358045
  4. Ahern BJ, Richardson DW. Chapter 7 – surgical site infection and the use of antimicrobials. In: Equine Surgery, 4th edn., Eds: Auer J., Stick J., Elsevier, Philadelphia: pp 68–84.
  5. Owens CD, Stoessel K. Surgical site infections: epidemiology, microbiology and prevention. J. Hosp. Infect. 70, 3–10.
    pubmed: 19022115
  6. Verwilghen D. Surgical site infections: what do we know?. Equine Vet. J. 47, 753–755.
    pubmed: 26475770
  7. Salem SE, Proudman CJ, Archer DC. Prevention of post operative complications following surgical treatment of equine colic: current evidence. Equine Vet. J. 48, 143–151.
    pubmed: 26440916
  8. Tnibar A, Grubbe Lin K, Thurøe Nielsen K, Christophersen MT, Lindegaard C, Martinussen T, Ekstrøm CT. Effect of a stent bandage on the likelihood of incisional infection following exploratory coeliotomy for colic in horses: a comparative retrospective study. Equine Vet. J. 45, 564–569.
    pubmed: 23294287
  9. Smith LJ, Mellor DJ, Marr CM, Reid S. Incisional complications following exploratory celiotomy: does an abdominal bandage reduce the risk?. Equine Vet. J. 39, 277–283.
    pubmed: 17520982
  10. Turtiainen J, Hakala T, Hakkarainen T, Karhukorpi J. The impact of surgical wound bacterial colonization on the incidence of surgical site infection after lower limb vascular surgery: a prospective observational study. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 47, 411–417.
    pubmed: 24512892
  11. Klohnen A, Biedrzycki A. A new approach to the detection of incisional site infections in horses after colic surgery (Abstract). In: Proceedings of the 48th British Equine Veterinary Association Congress. Equine Veterinary Journal Ltd, Newmarket. p 244.
  12. Rodriguez F, Kramer J, Fales W, Wilson D, Keegan K. Evaluation of intraoperative culture results as a predictor for short‐term incisional complications in 49 horses undergoing abdominal surgery. Vet. Ther. 10, E1–E13.
    pubmed: 20425731
  13. Ingle‐Fehr JE, Baxter GM, Howard RD, Trotter GW, Stashak TS. Bacterial culturing of ventral median celiotomies for prediction of postoperative incisional complications in horses. Vet. Surg. 26, 7–13.
    pubmed: 9123817
  14. Best AJ, Nixon MF, Taylor GJS. Brief exposure of 0.05% chlorhexidine does not impair non‐osteoarthritic human cartilage metabolism. J. Hosp. Infect. 67, 67–71.
    pubmed: 17664016
  15. CLSI. Development of In Vitro Susceptibility Testing Criteria and Quality Control Parameters; Approved Guideline, 3rd edn.. CLSI document M23–A3, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA, USA.
  16. CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests For Bacterial Isolated From Animals. CLSI document M31‐A3. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA, USA.
  17. Valverde A, Gunkel C, Doherty TJ, Giguere S, Pollak AS. Effect of a constant rate infusion of lidocaine on the quality of recovery from sevoflurane or isoflurane general anaesthesia in horses. Equine Vet. J. 37, 559–564.
    pubmed: 16295936
  18. Torfs S, Delesalle C, Dewulf J, Devisscher L, Deprez P. Risk factors for equine postoperative ileus and effectiveness of prophylactic lidocaine. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 23, 606–611.
    pubmed: 19422470
  19. Presterl E, Suchomel M, Eder M, Reichmann S, Lassnigg A, Graninger W, Rotter M. Effects of alcohols, povidone‐iodine and hydrogen peroxide on biofilms of Staphylococcus epidermidis. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 60, 417–420.
    pubmed: 17586808
  20. Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, Harbarth S, Hindler JF, Kahlmeter G, Olsson‐Liljequist B, Paterson DL. Multidrug‐resistant, extensively drug‐resistant and pandrug‐resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 18, 268–281.
    pubmed: 21793988
  21. RC Team. R: A Language and Environment For Statistical Computing (Version 3.0. 2). R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
  22. Hibbard JS, Mulberry GK, Brady AR. A clinical study comparing the skin antisepsis and safety of chloraprep, 70% isopropyl alcohol, and 2% aqueous chlorhexidine. J. Infus. Nurs. 25, 244.
    pubmed: 12131506
  23. Galuppo LD, Pascoe JR, Jang SS, Willits NH, Greenman SL. Evaluation of iodophor skin preparation techniques and factors influencing drainage from ventral midline incisions in horses. J. Am. Vet. Med. Ass. 215, 963–969.
    pubmed: 10511861
  24. Smith LJ, Mair TS, Rycroft A, Witte TH, Perkins JD. A Prospective Study of Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Isolates From Equine Celiotomy Incisions. In: Proceeding of 11th Equine Colic Symposium, Dublin.
  25. Maddox TW, Clegg PD, Williams NJ, Pinchbeck GL. Antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from horses: epidemiology of antimicrobial resistance. Equine Vet. J. 47, 756–765.
    pubmed: 26084443
  26. Isgren CM, Salem SE, Archer DC, Worsman FCF, Townsend NB. Risk factors for surgical site infection following laparotomy: effect of season and perioperative variables and reporting of bacterial isolates in 287 horses. Equine Vet. J. 49, 39–44.
    pubmed: 26713622
  27. Ahern BJ, Richardson DW, Boston RC, Schaer TP. Orthopedic infections in equine long bone fractures and arthrodeses treated by internal fixation: 192 cases (1990–2006). Vet. Surg. 39, 588–593.
    pubmed: 20459481
  28. Snyder JR, Pascoe JR, Hirsh DC. Antimicrobial susceptibility of microorganisms isolated from equine orthopedic patients. Vet. Surg. 16, 197‐201.
    pubmed: 3507142
  29. Kao LS, Lew DF, Arab SN, Todd SR, Awad SS, Carrick MM, Corneille MG, Lally KP. Local variations in the epidemiology, microbiology, and outcome of necrotizing soft‐tissue infections: a multicenter study. Am. J. Surg. 202, 139–145.
    pmc: PMC3150284pubmed: 21545997
  30. Tsitsilonis S, Druschel C, Wichlas F, Haas NP, Schwabe P, Bail HJ, Schaser KD. Necrotizing fasciitis: is the bacterial spectrum changing?. Langenbecks Arch. Surg. 398, 153–159.
    pubmed: 22833058
  31. Schneider RK, Bramlage LR, Moore RM, Mecklenburg LM, Kohn CW, Gabel AA. A retrospective study of 192 horses affected with septic arthritis/tenosynovitis. Equine Vet. J. 24, 436–442.
    pubmed: 1459056
  32. Maddox TW, Williams NJ, Clegg PD, O'Donnell AJ, Dawson S, Pinchbeck GL. Longitudinal study of antimicrobial‐resistant commensal Escherichia coli in the faeces of horses in an equine hospital. Prev. Vet. Med. 100, 134–145.
    pubmed: 21377225
  33. Andrade N, Schmiedt CW, Cornell K, Radlinsky MG, Heidingsfelder L, Clarke K, Hurley DJ, Hinson WD. Survey of intraoperative bacterial contamination in dogs undergoing elective orthopedic surgery. Vet. Surg. 45, 214–222.
    pubmed: 26757033
  34. Ireifej S, Marino DJ, Loughin CA, Lesser ML, Akerman M. Risk factors and clinical relevance of positive intraoperative bacterial cultures in dogs with total hip replacement. Vet. Surg. 41, 63–68.
    pubmed: 22188365
  35. Lee KC, Kapatkin AS. Positive intraoperative cultures and canine total hip replacement: risk factors, periprosthetic infection, and surgical success. J. Am. Anim. Hosp. Ass. 38, 271–278.
    pubmed: 12022414
  36. Jonsson EÖ, Johannesdottir H, Robertsson O, Mogensen B. Bacterial contamination of the wound during primary total hip and knee replacement: median 13 years of follow‐up of 90 replacements. Acta Orthop. 85, 159–164.
    pmc: PMC3967258pubmed: 24650025
  37. Bowen M. Antimicrobial stewardship: time for change. Equine Vet. J. 45, 127–129.
    pubmed: 23368774
  38. Goh C, Knight JC. Enhanced understanding of the host–pathogen interaction in sepsis: new opportunities for omic approaches. Lancet Respir. Med. 5, 212–223.
    pubmed: 28266329
  39. Verwilghen D, Singh A. Fighting surgical site infections in small animals: are we getting anywhere?. Vet. Clin. N. Am.: Small Anim. Pract. 45, 243–276.
    pubmed: 25542615
  40. Kern I, Bartmann CP, Verspohl J, Rohde J, Bienert‐Zeit A. Bacteraemia before, during and after tooth extraction in horses in the absence of antimicrobial administration. Equine Vet. J. 49, 178–182.
    pubmed: 27062656
  41. Johns I, Tennent‐Brown B, Schaer BD, Southwood L, Boston R, Wilkins P. Blood culture status in mature horses with diarrhoea: a possible association with survival. Equine Vet. J. 41, 160–164.
    pubmed: 19418745
  42. Hurcombe SD, Mudge MC, Daniels JB. Presumptive bacterial translocation in horses with strangulating small intestinal lesions requiring resection and anastomosis. J. Vet. Emerg. Crit. Care 22, 653–660.
    pubmed: 23148744
  43. Haas JP, Larson EL. Measurement of compliance with hand hygiene. J. Hosp. Infect. 66, 6–14.
    pubmed: 17276546
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,359 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.