| Literature DB >> 27052615 |
Urszula Kosikowska1,2, Anna Biernasiuk3, Paweł Rybojad4, Renata Łoś3, Anna Malm3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Haemophili are representative microbiota of the upper respiratory tract. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis and/or postoperative treatment on Haemophilus parainfluenzae prevalence, and antimicrobial sensitivity in short-term hospitalized patients with lung cancer who underwent surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Candida spp.; Haemophilus parainfluenzae; Lung cancer; Perioperative prophylaxis; Postoperative treatment; Respiratory microbiota
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27052615 PMCID: PMC4823876 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-016-0679-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Frequency of the throat colonization by Haemophilus parainfluenzae in healthy people and in patients with lung cancer before (Examination I, EI) and after (Examination II, EII) perioperative prophylaxis without and with postoperative treatment
| Group of patients | No. (%) of people | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uncolonized by haemophili | Colonized by | RR (95 % CI) | p value | |
| Healthy people ( | 16 (24.6) | 42 (64.6) | Referent | |
| Patients with lung cancer ( | ||||
| EI | 10 (33.3) | 19 (63.3) | 0.8 (0.4-1.5) | 0.6203 |
| EII | 17 (56.7) | 13 (43.3) | 0.5 (0.3-0.8) | 0.0106 |
| EI + EII | 10 (33.3) | 20 (66.7) | 0.8 (0.4-1.6) | 0.6264 |
Abbreviations: RR relative risk
Fig. 1Changes in number of patients with lung cancer colonized by Haemophilus parainfluenzae depending on perioperative prophylaxis without or with postoperative treatment on the basis of Examination I (EI) and Examination II (EII) data
Prevalence of throat colonization by Candida spp. and other than Haemophilus spp.Gram-negative bacteria in patients with lung cancer before (Examination I, EI) and after (Examination II, EII) perioperative prophylaxis without and with postoperative treatment
| No. of patient | E I | E II | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yeasts | Gram-negative bacteria | Yeasts | Gram-negative bacteria | |
| 2 |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
| - |
| - |
| 5 | - | - |
| - |
| 6 | - | - |
| - |
| 7 | - | - |
| - |
| 8 |
|
|
| - |
| 9 | - | - |
| - |
| 11 | - | - |
|
|
| 12 |
| - |
| - |
| 13 | - | - |
|
|
| 14 |
| - |
| - |
| 15 |
| - |
| - |
| 16 |
| - |
| - |
| 17 |
| - |
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
|
|
| 21 |
| - |
| - |
| 22 |
| - |
| - |
| 23 |
| - |
|
|
| 24 |
| - |
| - |
| 25 | - |
| - | |
| 26 |
| - |
| - |
| 27 |
| - |
|
|
| 29 |
| - |
| - |
| 30 |
| - |
| - |
aTwo phenotypically different strains of Candida albicans were selected
The effect of antimicrobial preoperative prophylaxis with or without postoperative treatment on the resistance of Haemophilus parainfluenzae isolates selected from patients with lung cancer in Examination I (EI) and in Examination II (EII)
| Colonized patients |
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | Prophylaxis | Treatment | Examination | No. (%) of isolates | Profile of resistance (No. of isolates) | |
| Sensitive | Resistant | |||||
| 10 | Yes | No | EI ( | 9 (15.5) | 9 (15.5) | AmPen+ (1) |
| Te (1) | ||||||
| Sxt (1) | ||||||
| SxtTe (1) | ||||||
| CazCtxCz (2) | ||||||
| AmAmcSam (1) | ||||||
| AmAmcCazAtmTe (1) | ||||||
| AmAmcSamCtxCzAtm (1) | ||||||
| EII ( | 7 (12.1) | 9 (15.5) | AmPen+ (1) | |||
| Cz (1) | ||||||
| Te (1) | ||||||
| Sxt (1) | ||||||
| SxtTe (1) | ||||||
| AmAmcSam (1) | ||||||
| AmAmcSamCtxCzAtm (1) | ||||||
| AmPen+SamCazCzCxmCtx (1) | ||||||
| AmAmcSamCazCtxCzAtmSxt (1) | ||||||
| 10 | Yes | Yes | EI ( | 10 (17.2) | 4 (6.9) | Cz (1) |
| Sxt (1) | ||||||
| AmAmcAtmAzmSxt (1) | ||||||
| AmSamCazCzIpm (1) | ||||||
| EII ( | 9 (15.5) | 1 (1.7) | Sxt (1) | |||
Abbreviations: Am ampicillin; AmC amoksicillin/clavulanic acid; An amikacin; Atm aztreonam; Azm azithromycin; Caz ceftazidime; Ctx cefotaxime; Cxm cefuroxime; Cz cefazoline; Ipm imipenem; Sxt trimethoprim/sulfametoksazol; Te tetracycline; Pen + penicyllinase-positive