PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Comparing DNA testing and culture for dog skin infection bacteria

By Smart, Kimberly et al.·Published in Veterinary dermatology·2025·Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Comparison of commercial next-generation sequencing assays to conventional culture methods for bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility of samples obtained from clinical cases of canine superficial bacterial folliculitis.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of 24 dogs with skin lesions typical of superficial bacterial folliculitis (SBF) were tested to identify the bacteria causing their infections and to check which antibiotics would work best. Researchers compared two modern testing methods, next-generation sequencing (NGS) and traditional culture methods. While NGS found more types of bacteria, both methods took about the same time to get results, and neither method consistently identified antibiotic resistance. The study concluded that NGS is not a reliable replacement for traditional culture in diagnosing SBF in dogs at this time.

People also search for: dog skin infection treatment · superficial bacterial folliculitis in dogs · antibiotic resistance in dogs

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing is an important step in timely therapeutic decisions for canine superficial bacterial folliculitis (SBF), commonly caused by Staphylococcus pseudintermedius. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) offers the appeal of potentially expedited results with complete detection of bacterial organisms and associated resistance genes compared to culture. Limited studies exist comparing the two methodologies for clinical samples. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: To compare and contrast genotypic and phenotypic methods for bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility from cases of canine SBF. ANIMALS: Twenty-four client-owned dogs with lesions consistent with SBF were enrolled. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sterile culturette swab was used to sample dogs with SBF lesions. The swab was rinsed in 0.9 mL of sterile phosphate-buffered saline and vortexed to create a homogenous solution. Two swabs for NGS laboratories (Labs) and one swab for culture (Culture Lab) were randomly sampled from this solution and submitted for bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility. RESULTS: No statistical difference regarding turnaround time for NGS Labs compared to Culture Lab was found. NGS Lab 1 identified more organisms than NGS Lab 2 and Culture Lab, which were both statistically significant. There was no statistical difference in detection frequency for Staphylococcus spp. among all laboratories. There was poor agreement for the presence of meticillin resistance and most antimicrobials among all laboratories. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Utilisation of NGS as a replacement for traditional culture when sampling canine SBF lesions is not supported at this time.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39323044/