Common superficial and deep cutaneous bacterial infections in domestic animals: A review

Abstract

The skin covers the external surface of animals, and it is constantly exposed to and inhabited by different microorganisms, including bacteria. Alterations in the skin barrier allow commensal and/or pathogenic bacteria to proliferate and penetrate deep into the lower layers of the skin. Being the first barrier to the external environment, the skin is prone to injuries, allowing the penetration of microorganisms that may lead to severe deep infections. Companion animals, especially dogs, are prone to bacterial infections, often secondary to allergic dermatitis. When environmental conditions are unfavorable, horses, cattle, sheep, and goats can develop superficial infections, such as those caused by Dermatophilus congolensis. Deep inflammation is commonly caused by Mycobacterium spp., which results in granulomatous to pyogranulomatous dermatitis and panniculitis. Likewise, bacteria such as Nocardia spp. and Actinomyces spp. can cause deep pyogranulomatous inflammation. Bacteria that lead to deep necrotizing lesions (eg, necrotizing fasciitis/flesh-eating bacteria) can be severe and even result in death. This review includes an overview of the most common cutaneous bacterial infections of domestic animals, highlighting the main features and histologic morphology of the bacteria, cutaneous structures involved, and the type of inflammatory infiltrates.

Evaluation of the Impact of Near-Infrared Multiwavelength Locked System Laser Therapy on Skin Microbiome in Atopic Dogs

“…In our study, the most abundant bacterial phyla were Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, and Proteobacteria, and the most abundant fungal phylum was Ascomycota. These results correlated with those of previous studies [ 29 , 57 , 68 ].…”

Significant Differences in Intestinal Bacterial Communities of Sympatric Bean Goose, Hooded Crane, and Domestic Goose

“…A co-occurrence network analysis was conducted using R-Studio (V.4.2.1) and Gephi v.0.9.2 software [ 43 ]. The potential pathogens were identified via the functional annotation of prokaryotic taxa (FAPROTAX) database [ 44 ] and searched as keywords in the Web of Science to identify their hosts and symptoms [ 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 ]. The information of pathogens was shown in Table S3 .…”

“…Figure S7: The stability of co-occurrence network. References [ 20 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 ] are cited in the Supplementary Materials .…”