新生儿病原体和易感模式的变化概况:来自印度南部三级中心的前瞻性观察研究

Krishnan Chakkiyar, Gireeshan Veluthedath Kuzhiyil, Maya Sudhakaran, Shameem Anathan Mohammed, Nabeel Valappil Faisal, Mohandas Nair
{"title":"新生儿病原体和易感模式的变化概况:来自印度南部三级中心的前瞻性观察研究","authors":"Krishnan Chakkiyar, Gireeshan Veluthedath Kuzhiyil, Maya Sudhakaran, Shameem Anathan Mohammed, Nabeel Valappil Faisal, Mohandas Nair","doi":"10.34172/jrcm.2023.32177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Changing the pattern of neonatal pathogens poses challenges to the management of neonatal sepsis. Profile and antimicrobial susceptibility of neonatal pathogens were evaluated in this prospective observational study in a tertiary center. Methods: Neonates with risk factors and clinical features of sepsis were screened. Blood culture performed in positive-screen babies. Antimicrobial susceptibility was also evaluated. Statistical significance was tested by the chi-square test and t test accordingly. Univariate analysis was performed to study possible correlations in this regard. Results: Out of 431 suspected cases, 89 neonates (20.65%) had sepsis. The rate of early and late-onset sepsis (LOS) was 48.3% and 51.7%, respectively. The clinical spectrum included septicemia 68 (76.5%), congenital pneumonia 13 (14.7%), meningitis 5 (5.7%), and septic arthritis 3 (3.4%), respectively. Gram-positive bacteria constituted 61 (68.5%), while gram-negative was 28 (31.5%) (P<0.05). Staphylococcus aureus (23.6%) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) (22.5%) were the most common isolates. Acinetobacter (15.8%), coagulase-negative staphylococcus areus (CoNS) (11%), Klebsiella (7.9%), enterococci (8%), E. coli (4.5%), and ß hemolytic streptococci (1 case) were other detected pathogens. MRSA, Acinetobacter, and coagulase-negative S. aureus as a single entity involved in sepsis pathogenesis (50.6%) showed a positive correlation with inborn babies, pre-term, low birth weight, and early-onset sepsis (OR; 95% CI: 2.20; 0.94–5.20, 1.82; 0.79–4.22, 1.25; 0.55–2.89 and 1.05; 0.46–2.50 respectively). Susceptibility pattern was penicillin (12.3%), ampicillin (6.7%), cloxacillin (42.9%), cefotaxime (8%), cefazolin (37.9%), cefoperazone sulbactam (81.5%), piperacillin-tazobactam (68.9%), gentamicin (63.5%), amikacin (47.9%), vancomycin (88.9%), linezolid (88.6%), co-trimoxazole (55.4%), and clindamycin (50%). Conclusion: Gram-positive pathogens and opportunistic pathogens like Acinetobacter predominate over the conventional gram-negative pathogens in neonates. Of note, penicillin, ampicillin, and cefotaxime are not suitable for the empiric treatment of neonatal sepsis.","PeriodicalId":17071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Clinical Medicine","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The changing profile of neonatal pathogens and susceptibility pattern: prospective observational study from a tertiary center in South India\",\"authors\":\"Krishnan Chakkiyar, Gireeshan Veluthedath Kuzhiyil, Maya Sudhakaran, Shameem Anathan Mohammed, Nabeel Valappil Faisal, Mohandas Nair\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/jrcm.2023.32177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Changing the pattern of neonatal pathogens poses challenges to the management of neonatal sepsis. Profile and antimicrobial susceptibility of neonatal pathogens were evaluated in this prospective observational study in a tertiary center. Methods: Neonates with risk factors and clinical features of sepsis were screened. Blood culture performed in positive-screen babies. Antimicrobial susceptibility was also evaluated. Statistical significance was tested by the chi-square test and t test accordingly. Univariate analysis was performed to study possible correlations in this regard. Results: Out of 431 suspected cases, 89 neonates (20.65%) had sepsis. The rate of early and late-onset sepsis (LOS) was 48.3% and 51.7%, respectively. The clinical spectrum included septicemia 68 (76.5%), congenital pneumonia 13 (14.7%), meningitis 5 (5.7%), and septic arthritis 3 (3.4%), respectively. Gram-positive bacteria constituted 61 (68.5%), while gram-negative was 28 (31.5%) (P<0.05). Staphylococcus aureus (23.6%) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) (22.5%) were the most common isolates. Acinetobacter (15.8%), coagulase-negative staphylococcus areus (CoNS) (11%), Klebsiella (7.9%), enterococci (8%), E. coli (4.5%), and ß hemolytic streptococci (1 case) were other detected pathogens. MRSA, Acinetobacter, and coagulase-negative S. aureus as a single entity involved in sepsis pathogenesis (50.6%) showed a positive correlation with inborn babies, pre-term, low birth weight, and early-onset sepsis (OR; 95% CI: 2.20; 0.94–5.20, 1.82; 0.79–4.22, 1.25; 0.55–2.89 and 1.05; 0.46–2.50 respectively). Susceptibility pattern was penicillin (12.3%), ampicillin (6.7%), cloxacillin (42.9%), cefotaxime (8%), cefazolin (37.9%), cefoperazone sulbactam (81.5%), piperacillin-tazobactam (68.9%), gentamicin (63.5%), amikacin (47.9%), vancomycin (88.9%), linezolid (88.6%), co-trimoxazole (55.4%), and clindamycin (50%). Conclusion: Gram-positive pathogens and opportunistic pathogens like Acinetobacter predominate over the conventional gram-negative pathogens in neonates. Of note, penicillin, ampicillin, and cefotaxime are not suitable for the empiric treatment of neonatal sepsis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Clinical Medicine\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Clinical Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/jrcm.2023.32177\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jrcm.2023.32177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前言:改变新生儿病原体的模式对新生儿败血症的管理提出了挑战。本前瞻性观察研究在三级中心评估新生儿病原体的概况和抗菌药物敏感性。方法:筛选具有脓毒症危险因素及临床特征的新生儿。对筛查阳性的婴儿进行血培养。并进行了药敏评价。采用卡方检验和t检验进行统计学显著性检验。采用单变量分析来研究这方面可能的相关性。结果:431例新生儿疑似败血症89例(20.65%)。早、晚发型脓毒症(LOS)发生率分别为48.3%和51.7%。临床表现为败血症68例(76.5%),先天性肺炎13例(14.7%),脑膜炎5例(5.7%),脓毒性关节炎3例(3.4%)。革兰氏阳性菌61株(68.5%),革兰氏阴性菌28株(31.5%)(P<0.05)。以金黄色葡萄球菌(23.6%)和耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)(22.5%)最为常见。不动杆菌(15.8%)、凝固酶阴性金黄色葡萄球菌(11%)、克雷伯氏菌(7.9%)、肠球菌(8%)、大肠杆菌(4.5%)、溶血链球菌(1例)。MRSA、不动杆菌和凝固酶阴性金黄色葡萄球菌作为一个单一实体参与脓毒症的发病机制(50.6%),与新生儿、早产、低出生体重和早发性脓毒症(OR;95% ci: 2.20;0.94 - -5.20, 1.82;0.79 - -4.22, 1.25;0.55-2.89和1.05;0.46 - -2.50)。敏感型为青霉素(12.3%)、氨苄西林(6.7%)、氯西林(42.9%)、头孢噻肟(8%)、头孢唑林(37.9%)、头孢哌酮舒巴坦(81.5%)、哌拉西林-他唑巴坦(68.9%)、庆大霉素(63.5%)、阿米卡星(47.9%)、万古霉素(88.9%)、利奈唑胺(88.6%)、复方新诺明(55.4%)、克林霉素(50%)。结论:革兰氏阳性致病菌和不动杆菌等条件致病菌在新生儿中以常规革兰氏阴性致病菌为主。值得注意的是,青霉素、氨苄西林和头孢噻肟不适合用于新生儿败血症的经验性治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The changing profile of neonatal pathogens and susceptibility pattern: prospective observational study from a tertiary center in South India
Introduction: Changing the pattern of neonatal pathogens poses challenges to the management of neonatal sepsis. Profile and antimicrobial susceptibility of neonatal pathogens were evaluated in this prospective observational study in a tertiary center. Methods: Neonates with risk factors and clinical features of sepsis were screened. Blood culture performed in positive-screen babies. Antimicrobial susceptibility was also evaluated. Statistical significance was tested by the chi-square test and t test accordingly. Univariate analysis was performed to study possible correlations in this regard. Results: Out of 431 suspected cases, 89 neonates (20.65%) had sepsis. The rate of early and late-onset sepsis (LOS) was 48.3% and 51.7%, respectively. The clinical spectrum included septicemia 68 (76.5%), congenital pneumonia 13 (14.7%), meningitis 5 (5.7%), and septic arthritis 3 (3.4%), respectively. Gram-positive bacteria constituted 61 (68.5%), while gram-negative was 28 (31.5%) (P<0.05). Staphylococcus aureus (23.6%) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) (22.5%) were the most common isolates. Acinetobacter (15.8%), coagulase-negative staphylococcus areus (CoNS) (11%), Klebsiella (7.9%), enterococci (8%), E. coli (4.5%), and ß hemolytic streptococci (1 case) were other detected pathogens. MRSA, Acinetobacter, and coagulase-negative S. aureus as a single entity involved in sepsis pathogenesis (50.6%) showed a positive correlation with inborn babies, pre-term, low birth weight, and early-onset sepsis (OR; 95% CI: 2.20; 0.94–5.20, 1.82; 0.79–4.22, 1.25; 0.55–2.89 and 1.05; 0.46–2.50 respectively). Susceptibility pattern was penicillin (12.3%), ampicillin (6.7%), cloxacillin (42.9%), cefotaxime (8%), cefazolin (37.9%), cefoperazone sulbactam (81.5%), piperacillin-tazobactam (68.9%), gentamicin (63.5%), amikacin (47.9%), vancomycin (88.9%), linezolid (88.6%), co-trimoxazole (55.4%), and clindamycin (50%). Conclusion: Gram-positive pathogens and opportunistic pathogens like Acinetobacter predominate over the conventional gram-negative pathogens in neonates. Of note, penicillin, ampicillin, and cefotaxime are not suitable for the empiric treatment of neonatal sepsis.
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
CiteScore
0.50
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信