[Selective flora suppression for control of infection in surgical intensive care medicine].

B Thülig, U Hartenauer, W Diemer, P Lawin, W Fegeler, R Kehrel, W Ritzerfeld
{"title":"[Selective flora suppression for control of infection in surgical intensive care medicine].","authors":"B Thülig,&nbsp;U Hartenauer,&nbsp;W Diemer,&nbsp;P Lawin,&nbsp;W Fegeler,&nbsp;R Kehrel,&nbsp;W Ritzerfeld","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The question to be answered in this study was: Is prophylactic selective florasuppression advantageous compared to conventional antibiotic policy as far as microbial colonisation, infection, mortality and development of resistance are concerned? A prospective, consecutive, placebo-controlled study in two ICU's was carried out during four 6-months periods. 200 patients who were intubated for at least 3 days, required intensive care for a minimum of 5 days, and belonged to either class III or IV according to the \"Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System\" were included in the study. They received either placebo or the prophylaxis regimen described by Stoutenbeek et al., consisting of polymyxin E, tobramycin and amphotericin B. Oropharyngeal, tracheobronchial and rectal colonisation with aerobic gram-negative bacilli markedly decreased in the test groups. The rates of nosocomial bronchopulmonary infections (ICU I and II) and urinary tract infections (ICU II) were significantly reduced. There was no significant reduction in wound infection, septicaemia and mortality rates. No development of resistance and no increase of multi-resistant strains occurred. Selective florasuppression is effective in reducing infection rates in critically ill patients without development of resistant strains.</p>","PeriodicalId":7813,"journal":{"name":"Anasthesie, Intensivtherapie, Notfallmedizin","volume":"24 6","pages":"345-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1989-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anasthesie, Intensivtherapie, Notfallmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The question to be answered in this study was: Is prophylactic selective florasuppression advantageous compared to conventional antibiotic policy as far as microbial colonisation, infection, mortality and development of resistance are concerned? A prospective, consecutive, placebo-controlled study in two ICU's was carried out during four 6-months periods. 200 patients who were intubated for at least 3 days, required intensive care for a minimum of 5 days, and belonged to either class III or IV according to the "Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System" were included in the study. They received either placebo or the prophylaxis regimen described by Stoutenbeek et al., consisting of polymyxin E, tobramycin and amphotericin B. Oropharyngeal, tracheobronchial and rectal colonisation with aerobic gram-negative bacilli markedly decreased in the test groups. The rates of nosocomial bronchopulmonary infections (ICU I and II) and urinary tract infections (ICU II) were significantly reduced. There was no significant reduction in wound infection, septicaemia and mortality rates. No development of resistance and no increase of multi-resistant strains occurred. Selective florasuppression is effective in reducing infection rates in critically ill patients without development of resistant strains.

选择性菌群抑制在外科重症医学感染控制中的应用
本研究需要回答的问题是:就微生物定植、感染、死亡率和耐药性的发展而言,预防性选择性抑菌比常规抗生素政策更有利吗?一项前瞻性、连续、安慰剂对照研究在两个ICU进行,为期4个6个月。纳入200例插管时间不少于3天,需要重症监护时间不少于5天,根据“治疗干预评分系统”属于III类或IV类的患者。他们接受安慰剂或Stoutenbeek等人描述的预防方案,包括多粘菌素E、妥布霉素和两性霉素b。试验组口咽、气管、支气管和直肠的需氧革兰氏阴性杆菌定植明显减少。院内支气管肺感染(ICU I和ICU II)和尿路感染(ICU II)发生率明显降低。伤口感染、败血症和死亡率没有显著降低。耐药菌株未出现,多重耐药菌株未增加。选择性抑菌可有效降低危重患者的感染率而不产生耐药菌株。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信