Clinical Evaluation of a Centralized In-Clinic Direct Culture and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Workflow for Canine and Feline Skin, Ear, and Urine Infections

Background/Objectives: Rapid antimicrobial decision-making in small-animal practice is limited by the turnaround time (≥2 days) of conventional laboratory-based culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). Existing point-of-care and in-clinic tests can provide faster results, but their performance often depends on user experience. This study evaluated VetBac, a hybrid workflow in which the test is conducted in the clinic, while experts centrally interpret bacterial growth on plates. Methods: We analyzed 60 interpretable plates from canine and feline skin, ear, and urine infections. In the clinic, samples were inoculated onto chromogenic Mueller–Hinton agar plates, after which antibiotic discs were applied. Plates were incubated for 16–20 h, photographed, and interpreted centrally by an expert. For comparison, samples were submitted in parallel to standard microbiology laboratories. Results: Identification of primary bacterial populations in clinical samples showed high species-level agreement with laboratory results (83.9%), increasing to 100.0% when staphylococci species were grouped. Secondary bacteria agreement (16.7%) was lower due to unrecognizability and overgrowth by dominant bacteria. Overall AST agreement was 93.6% (262/280), with 91.9% sensitivity for detecting resistance and 94.0% specificity for detecting susceptibility. VetBac-susceptible discrepancies occurred in 5/62 laboratory-resistant comparisons (8.1%), and VetBac-resistant discrepancies occurred in 13/218 laboratory-susceptible comparisons (6.0%). Conclusions: In interpretable skin, ear, and urine samples, the VetBac workflow showed high agreement with laboratory results for primary bacterial identification and AST. These findings support the hybrid in-clinic/centralized model as an adjunctive source of earlier antimicrobial decision support, pending laboratory confirmation. However, the study did not estimate the proportion of all clinical samples suitable for direct culture and AST.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Antibiotics
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics15101016
Primary Topic
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Clinical Evaluation of a Centralized In-Clinic Direct Culture and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Workflow for Canine and Feline Skin, Ear, and Urine Infections

Dulmini Nanayakkara Sapugahawatte, Daira Viškere, Urška Vesel, Eva Štruc et al.
Antibiotics
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
article

Clinical Evaluation of a Centralized In-Clinic Direct Culture and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Workflow for Canine and Feline Skin, Ear, and Urine Infections

Dulmini Nanayakkara Sapugahawatte, Daira Viškere, Urška Vesel, Eva Štruc, Blaž Cugmas, Liisi Kulasalu
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Rapid antimicrobial decision-making in small-animal practice is limited by the turnaround time (≥2 days) of conventional laboratory-based culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). Existing point-of-care and in-clinic tests can provide faster results, but their performance often depends on user experience. This study evaluated VetBac, a hybrid workflow in which the test is conducted in the clinic, while experts centrally interpret bacterial growth on plates. Methods: We analyzed 60 interpretable plates from canine and feline skin, ear, and urine infections. In the clinic, samples were inoculated onto chromogenic Mueller–Hinton agar plates, after which antibiotic discs were applied. Plates were incubated for 16–20 h, photographed, and interpreted centrally by an expert. For comparison, samples were submitted in parallel to standard microbiology laboratories. Results: Identification of primary bacterial populations in clinical samples showed high species-level agreement with laboratory results (83.9%), increasing to 100.0% when staphylococci species were grouped. Secondary bacteria agreement (16.7%) was lower due to unrecognizability and overgrowth by dominant bacteria. Overall AST agreement was 93.6% (262/280), with 91.9% sensitivity for detecting resistance and 94.0% specificity for detecting susceptibility. VetBac-susceptible discrepancies occurred in 5/62 laboratory-resistant comparisons (8.1%), and VetBac-resistant discrepancies occurred in 13/218 laboratory-susceptible comparisons (6.0%). Conclusions: In interpretable skin, ear, and urine samples, the VetBac workflow showed high agreement with laboratory results for primary bacterial identification and AST. These findings support the hybrid in-clinic/centralized model as an adjunctive source of earlier antimicrobial decision support, pending laboratory confirmation. However, the study did not estimate the proportion of all clinical samples suitable for direct culture and AST.

AntibioticsVol. 15(10)
Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies (LV), Estonian University of Life Sciences (EE), University of Latvia (LV)
Eesti Maaülikool, Latvijas Universitātes Fonds
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.