日本重症监护病房产β-内酰胺酶肠杆菌科菌的广谱监测:回顾性分析

Y. Kawano, T. Nishida, A. Togawa, Yuhei Irie, K. Hoshino, N. Matsumoto, H. Ishikura
{"title":"日本重症监护病房产β-内酰胺酶肠杆菌科菌的广谱监测:回顾性分析","authors":"Y. Kawano, T. Nishida, A. Togawa, Yuhei Irie, K. Hoshino, N. Matsumoto, H. Ishikura","doi":"10.4266/KJCCM.2016.00703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The effectiveness of surveillance to identify extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBLE) carriers is controversial during a non-outbreak situation. We performed additional stool cultures for ESBL-E among intensive care unit (ICU) patients already under active surveillance by means of sputum and urine cultures. We aimed to assess the efficacy of stool cultures for screening for ESBL-E in a non-outbreak situation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in an ICU. Sputum and urine samples were cultured for ESBL-E surveillance purposes from January to September 2013 (phase 1). Stool cultures were routinely performed in addition from January to September 2014 (phase 2). Antimicrobial use density values and clinical outcomes were investigated and compared between phase 1 and 2. Results: We identified 512 and 478 patients in phase 1 and phase 2, respectively. ESBL-E were found in the feces of 65 (13.6%) patients in phase 2. The antimicrobial use density values (expressed as defined daily doses per 1,000 bed-days) were not significantly different between the two phases for fluoroquinolones (7 vs. 10, p = 0.376), third-generation cephalosporins (24.2 vs. 29.5, p = 0.724), tazobactam/piperacillin (44.6 vs. 57.3, p = 0.489), and carbapenems (73 vs. 55.5, p = 0.222). Moreover, there were no significant differences in ICU mortality and length of stay (11.5% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.412, and 9 vs. 10 days, p = 0.28, respectively). Conclusions: Stool culture seemed ineffective in improving the antimicrobial use density of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, clinical outcomes, and ICU length of stay, and is not recommended for surveillance of ESBL-E in a non-outbreak situation.","PeriodicalId":255255,"journal":{"name":"The Korean Journal of Critical Care Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surveillance of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae Carriage in a Japanese Intensive Care Unit: a Retrospective Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Y. Kawano, T. Nishida, A. Togawa, Yuhei Irie, K. Hoshino, N. Matsumoto, H. Ishikura\",\"doi\":\"10.4266/KJCCM.2016.00703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The effectiveness of surveillance to identify extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBLE) carriers is controversial during a non-outbreak situation. We performed additional stool cultures for ESBL-E among intensive care unit (ICU) patients already under active surveillance by means of sputum and urine cultures. We aimed to assess the efficacy of stool cultures for screening for ESBL-E in a non-outbreak situation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in an ICU. Sputum and urine samples were cultured for ESBL-E surveillance purposes from January to September 2013 (phase 1). Stool cultures were routinely performed in addition from January to September 2014 (phase 2). Antimicrobial use density values and clinical outcomes were investigated and compared between phase 1 and 2. Results: We identified 512 and 478 patients in phase 1 and phase 2, respectively. ESBL-E were found in the feces of 65 (13.6%) patients in phase 2. The antimicrobial use density values (expressed as defined daily doses per 1,000 bed-days) were not significantly different between the two phases for fluoroquinolones (7 vs. 10, p = 0.376), third-generation cephalosporins (24.2 vs. 29.5, p = 0.724), tazobactam/piperacillin (44.6 vs. 57.3, p = 0.489), and carbapenems (73 vs. 55.5, p = 0.222). Moreover, there were no significant differences in ICU mortality and length of stay (11.5% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.412, and 9 vs. 10 days, p = 0.28, respectively). Conclusions: Stool culture seemed ineffective in improving the antimicrobial use density of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, clinical outcomes, and ICU length of stay, and is not recommended for surveillance of ESBL-E in a non-outbreak situation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":255255,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Korean Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Korean Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4266/KJCCM.2016.00703\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Korean Journal of Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4266/KJCCM.2016.00703","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:在非疫情情况下,监测识别广谱产β -内酰胺酶肠杆菌科(ESBLE)携带者的有效性存在争议。我们通过痰和尿培养对已经接受主动监测的重症监护病房(ICU)患者进行了额外的粪便培养,以检测ESBL-E。我们的目的是评估粪便培养在非爆发情况下筛查ESBL-E的功效。方法:我们在ICU进行回顾性队列研究。2013年1月至9月(第1期)进行痰液和尿液培养,用于监测ESBL-E。2014年1月至9月(第2期)常规进行粪便培养。调查并比较第1期和第2期的抗菌药物使用密度值和临床结果。结果:我们在1期和2期分别确定了512例和478例患者。2期65例(13.6%)患者粪便中发现ESBL-E。氟喹诺酮类药物(7 vs. 10, p = 0.376)、第三代头孢菌素(24.2 vs. 29.5, p = 0.724)、他唑巴坦/哌西林(44.6 vs. 57.3, p = 0.489)和碳青霉烯类药物(73 vs. 55.5, p = 0.222)的抗菌药物使用密度值(以每1000个床位日定义的每日剂量表示)在两期之间无显著差异。两组ICU死亡率和住院时间差异无统计学意义(分别为11.5%对9.8%,p = 0.412, 9天对10天,p = 0.28)。结论:粪便培养在改善广谱抗菌药物的使用密度、临床结果和ICU住院时间方面似乎无效,在非疫情情况下不建议用于监测ESBL-E。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surveillance of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae Carriage in a Japanese Intensive Care Unit: a Retrospective Analysis
Background: The effectiveness of surveillance to identify extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBLE) carriers is controversial during a non-outbreak situation. We performed additional stool cultures for ESBL-E among intensive care unit (ICU) patients already under active surveillance by means of sputum and urine cultures. We aimed to assess the efficacy of stool cultures for screening for ESBL-E in a non-outbreak situation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in an ICU. Sputum and urine samples were cultured for ESBL-E surveillance purposes from January to September 2013 (phase 1). Stool cultures were routinely performed in addition from January to September 2014 (phase 2). Antimicrobial use density values and clinical outcomes were investigated and compared between phase 1 and 2. Results: We identified 512 and 478 patients in phase 1 and phase 2, respectively. ESBL-E were found in the feces of 65 (13.6%) patients in phase 2. The antimicrobial use density values (expressed as defined daily doses per 1,000 bed-days) were not significantly different between the two phases for fluoroquinolones (7 vs. 10, p = 0.376), third-generation cephalosporins (24.2 vs. 29.5, p = 0.724), tazobactam/piperacillin (44.6 vs. 57.3, p = 0.489), and carbapenems (73 vs. 55.5, p = 0.222). Moreover, there were no significant differences in ICU mortality and length of stay (11.5% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.412, and 9 vs. 10 days, p = 0.28, respectively). Conclusions: Stool culture seemed ineffective in improving the antimicrobial use density of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, clinical outcomes, and ICU length of stay, and is not recommended for surveillance of ESBL-E in a non-outbreak situation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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