This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (10)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Rheumatology, Other  • Diagnosis  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Prospective Study

Andres F. Zuluaga, MD, MSc; Wilson Galvis, MD; Juan G. Saldarriaga, MD; Maria Agudelo, MD; Beatriz E. Salazar; Omar Vesga, MD

Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:95-100.

Background  Although bone specimens were established 25 years ago as the gold standard for etiologic diagnosis of chronic osteomyelitis, recent studies suggest that nonbone specimens are as accurate as bone to identify the causative agent. We examined concordance rates between cultures from nonbone and bone specimens in 100 patients.

Methods  Prospective study conducted at Hospital Universitario San Vicente de Paul, a 750-bed university-based hospital located in Medellín, Colombia. We included patients with chronic osteomyelitis who had been free of antibiotic therapy for at least 48 hours, excluding those with diabetic foot and decubitus ulcers. At least 1 nonbone and 1 bone specimen were taken from each individual and subjected to complete microbiologic analysis.

Results  Bone cultures allowed agent identification in 94% of cases, including anaerobic bacteria in 14%. Cultures of nonbone and bone specimens gave identical results in 30% of patients, with slightly better concordance in chronic osteomyelitis caused by Staphylococcus aureus (42%) than by all other bacterial species (22%). However, statistical concordance determined by the Cohen kappa statistic was less than 0 (–0.0092 ± 0.0324), indicating that the observed concordance was no better than that expected by chance alone (P>.99).

Conclusions  Appropriate diagnosis and therapy of chronic osteomyelitis require microbiologic cultures of the infected bone. Nonbone specimens are not valid for this purpose.

Author Affiliations: Section of Infection Diseases, Department of Medicine (Drs Zuluaga, Galvis, Agudelo, and Vesga and Ms Salazar), Department of Pharmacology (Dr Zuluaga), and Section of Orthopedics, Department of Surgery (Dr Saldarriaga), University of Antioquia Medical School and Hospital Universitario San Vicente de Paul, Medellín, Colombia.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Outcome of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis Treated Nonsurgically: A retrospective cohort study
Senneville et al.
Diabetes Care 2008;31:637-642.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Imaging-Guided Bone Biopsy for Osteomyelitis: Are There Factors Associated with Positive or Negative Cultures?
Wu et al.
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2007;188:1529-1534.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Probe-to-Bone Test for Diagnosing Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: Reliable or relic?
Lavery et al.
Diabetes Care 2007;30:270-274.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT