Pathogens Causing Surgical Site Infections After Lower Uterine Caesarean Sections and Recommendations for Antibiotic Guidelines.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Brendon Yeo, Penelope Clohessy, Andrew Walczak, Henco Nel, Rebecca McCann
{"title":"Pathogens Causing Surgical Site Infections After Lower Uterine Caesarean Sections and Recommendations for Antibiotic Guidelines.","authors":"Brendon Yeo, Penelope Clohessy, Andrew Walczak, Henco Nel, Rebecca McCann","doi":"10.1111/ajo.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Caesarean section surgical site infections (SSIs) have the potential to cause major complications however there remains a paucity of data on its microbiology and causative organisms.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this study was to identify the organisms causing SSIs in hospitalised patients after lower uterine caesarean section (LUCS). Secondary aims included investigating the differences in organisms isolated from elective versus emergency caesarean sections, and to compare the microbiology of superficial and deep SSIs.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a large retrospective study reviewing all SSIs after LUCS in Western Australian (WA) public hospitals from 2001 to 2021 with data obtained from the Healthcare Infection Surveillance of Western Australia (HISWA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 687 patients identified with an SSI following LUCS over this twenty-year period. The five most common organisms or organism groups isolated were methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (30.4%), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (14.7%), Enterobacterales (9.5%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9.3%), Staphylococcus lugdunensis (5.7%). Group A and B Streptococcus were isolated cumulatively in more than 5% of cases. There were a significantly higher number of superficial SSIs than deep SSIs, and SSIs were significantly more common post emergency LUCS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current Australian guidelines may not be appropriate in a considerable proportion of patients with LUCS SSIs, and patients with systemic features of infection should receive antibiotics with activity against P. aeruginosa and MRSA. Critically ill patients with features of sepsis or septic shock should be administered a carbapenem agent which has activity against AmpC/ESBL producing Enterobacterales, instead of piperacillin/tazobactam. Staphylococcus lugdunensis may be an under recognised pathogen in LUCS SSIs. This study also highlighted the importance of wound site sampling in SSIs to establish appropriate directed antimicrobial therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.70034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Caesarean section surgical site infections (SSIs) have the potential to cause major complications however there remains a paucity of data on its microbiology and causative organisms.

Aims: The aim of this study was to identify the organisms causing SSIs in hospitalised patients after lower uterine caesarean section (LUCS). Secondary aims included investigating the differences in organisms isolated from elective versus emergency caesarean sections, and to compare the microbiology of superficial and deep SSIs.

Materials and methods: This was a large retrospective study reviewing all SSIs after LUCS in Western Australian (WA) public hospitals from 2001 to 2021 with data obtained from the Healthcare Infection Surveillance of Western Australia (HISWA).

Results: There were 687 patients identified with an SSI following LUCS over this twenty-year period. The five most common organisms or organism groups isolated were methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (30.4%), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (14.7%), Enterobacterales (9.5%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9.3%), Staphylococcus lugdunensis (5.7%). Group A and B Streptococcus were isolated cumulatively in more than 5% of cases. There were a significantly higher number of superficial SSIs than deep SSIs, and SSIs were significantly more common post emergency LUCS.

Conclusions: Current Australian guidelines may not be appropriate in a considerable proportion of patients with LUCS SSIs, and patients with systemic features of infection should receive antibiotics with activity against P. aeruginosa and MRSA. Critically ill patients with features of sepsis or septic shock should be administered a carbapenem agent which has activity against AmpC/ESBL producing Enterobacterales, instead of piperacillin/tazobactam. Staphylococcus lugdunensis may be an under recognised pathogen in LUCS SSIs. This study also highlighted the importance of wound site sampling in SSIs to establish appropriate directed antimicrobial therapy.

下子宫剖宫产术后引起手术部位感染的病原体及抗生素指南的建议。
背景:剖宫产手术部位感染(ssi)有可能引起重大并发症,但其微生物学和致病微生物的数据仍然缺乏。目的:本研究的目的是确定下子宫剖宫产(LUCS)住院患者中引起ssi的微生物。次要目的包括调查择期和急诊剖宫产分离的微生物的差异,并比较浅表和深部ssi的微生物学。材料和方法:这是一项大型回顾性研究,回顾了2001年至2021年西澳大利亚州(WA)公立医院LUCS后的所有ssi,数据来自西澳大利亚州卫生保健感染监测(HISWA)。结果:在这20年期间,有687例患者在LUCS后被确定为SSI。最常见的5个菌群分别是甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)(30.4%)、耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)(14.7%)、肠杆菌(9.5%)、铜绿假单胞菌(9.3%)、卢氏葡萄球菌(5.7%)。累加性分离出A、B群链球菌的病例超过5%。浅表ssi的数量明显高于深部ssi,并且ssi在急诊后lus中更为常见。结论:现行的澳大利亚指南可能不适合相当比例的LUCS ssi患者,具有全身感染特征的患者应接受对铜绿假单胞菌和MRSA有活性的抗生素。具有脓毒症或感染性休克特征的危重患者应给予对产生AmpC/ESBL的肠杆菌具有活性的碳青霉烯类药物,而不是哌拉西林/他唑巴坦。在LUCS ssi中,lugdunensis葡萄球菌可能是一种未被识别的病原体。该研究还强调了伤口部位取样对建立适当的定向抗菌治疗的重要性。
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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.
×
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