ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES@#This study aimed to compare and analyze the consistency and difference between metageno-mic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and conventional bacterial culture in the detection of pathogenic microorganisms in maxillofacial space infection, as well as to provide a new detection method for the early clinical identification of pathogenic bacteria in maxillofacial space infection.@*METHODS@#The clinical data of 16 patients with oral and maxillofacial space infections in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from March 2020 to June 2020 were collected. mNGS and conventional bacterial culture methods were used to detect pus. We then analyzed and compared the test results of the two methods, including the test cycle, positive detection rate, anaerobic bacteria, facultative anaerobes and aerobic bacteria detection rates, distribution of pathogenic bacteria, relative species abundance, and resistance genes.@*RESULTS@#The average inspection period of mNGS was (18.81±3.73) h, and the average inspection period of bacterial culture was (83.25±11.64) h, the former was shorter than the latter (@*CONCLUSIONS@#Compared with conventional bacterial culture, mNGS has the characteristics of short test time, high sensitivity, and high accuracy. Thus, it is a new detection method for the early identification of pathogenic bacteria in maxillofacial space infection and is beneficial to the early clinical diagnosis and treatment of the disease.
Subject(s)
Humans , Bacteria/genetics , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Metagenomics , Sensitivity and Specificity , TechnologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#This study aims to observe the efficacy of vacuum sealing drainage (VSD) by continuous negative pressure drainage and saline irrigation in the treatment of oral and maxillofacial space infection.@*METHODS@#Retrospective analysis was conducted on 116 cases of maxillofacial space infection, and clinical data were collected to compare the therapeutic effects of routine incision with drainage treatment (traditional treatment group, 58 cases) and VSD treatment (VSD group, 58 cases).@*RESULTS@#The length of hospital stay, white blood cell count, scar length, frequency of dressing change, and pain degree of patients in the VSD group were all lower than those in the traditional treatment group. Moreover, the improvement degree of mouth opening in the VSD groups was better than that in the traditional treatment group (P<0.05).@*CONCLUSIONS@#VSD is a more effective method for the treatment of oral and maxillofacial space infection.
