S Schelenz1, D Nwaka, P R Hunter. 1. Department of Microbiology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK. sschelenz@doctors.org.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the current trends in bacteraemia and antimicrobial resistance and analyse the impact of ciprofloxacin prescribing on Gram-negative bacterial resistance in haematology and oncology patients. METHODS: Information on bacteraemia episodes, causative pathogens, antimicrobial resistance and consumption was compared between haematology and oncology patients at a UK cancer centre in a 14 year longitudinal surveillance study. RESULTS: Haematology patients had a 3-fold higher incidence of bacteraemia compared with oncology patients (10.9/1000 versus 3.6/1000 admissions, respectively). Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common Gram-positive cause of bacteraemia for both cancer groups, whereas the overall rate of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia was low (0.16/1000 admissions). Escherichia coli was the most common Gram-negative cause of bacteraemia for both groups, but with a higher incidence in haematology patients (0.92/1000 admissions) compared with oncology patients (0.5/1000 admissions). Pseudomonas spp. formed the second most common Gram-negative infection in haematology patients, with a 4-fold higher bacteraemia incidence compared with oncology patients (0.76 versus 0.16/1000 admissions). Ciprofloxacin resistance of Gram-negative isolates was 22% in haematology and 5% in oncology patients. The rate of ciprofloxacin use measured showed high ciprofloxacin consumption in haematology patients compared with oncology patients (3.6 versus 1.5 defined daily doses/10 admissions, respectively), suggesting that ciprofloxacin may drive resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Our longitudinal surveillance highlights the continued importance of Gram-negative bacteraemia, in particular that due to Pseudomonas, in the cancer population and raises concerns regarding increasing ciprofloxacin use and resistance.
OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the current trends in bacteraemia and antimicrobial resistance and analyse the impact of ciprofloxacin prescribing on Gram-negative bacterial resistance in haematology and oncology patients. METHODS: Information on bacteraemia episodes, causative pathogens, antimicrobial resistance and consumption was compared between haematology and oncology patients at a UK cancer centre in a 14 year longitudinal surveillance study. RESULTS: Haematology patients had a 3-fold higher incidence of bacteraemia compared with oncology patients (10.9/1000 versus 3.6/1000 admissions, respectively). Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common Gram-positive cause of bacteraemia for both cancer groups, whereas the overall rate of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia was low (0.16/1000 admissions). Escherichia coli was the most common Gram-negative cause of bacteraemia for both groups, but with a higher incidence in haematology patients (0.92/1000 admissions) compared with oncology patients (0.5/1000 admissions). Pseudomonas spp. formed the second most common Gram-negative infection in haematology patients, with a 4-fold higher bacteraemia incidence compared with oncology patients (0.76 versus 0.16/1000 admissions). Ciprofloxacin resistance of Gram-negative isolates was 22% in haematology and 5% in oncology patients. The rate of ciprofloxacin use measured showed high ciprofloxacin consumption in haematology patients compared with oncology patients (3.6 versus 1.5 defined daily doses/10 admissions, respectively), suggesting that ciprofloxacin may drive resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Our longitudinal surveillance highlights the continued importance of Gram-negative bacteraemia, in particular that due to Pseudomonas, in the cancer population and raises concerns regarding increasing ciprofloxacin use and resistance.
Authors: M P Freire; L C Pierrotti; H H C Filho; K Y Ibrahim; A S G K Magri; P R Bonazzi; L Hajar; M P E Diz; J Pereira; P M Hoff; E Abdala Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2014-08-30 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Michiel B Haeseker; Sander Croes; Cees Neef; Cathrien A Bruggeman; Leo M L Stolk; Annelies Verbon Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mar Marín; Carlota Gudiol; Carol Garcia-Vidal; Carmen Ardanuy; Jordi Carratalà Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 1.889