| Literature DB >> 31296179 |
Helena Ferreira Leal1, Jailton Azevedo1, Giulyana Evelyn Oliveira Silva2, Angelica Maria Lima Amorim2, Larissa Rangel Cabral de Roma2, Ana Carolina Palmeira Arraes3, Edilane Lins Gouveia4, Mitermayer Galvão Reis1, Ana Verena Mendes3,5, Marcio de Oliveira Silva3, Maria Goreth Barberino3, Ianick Souto Martins6, Joice Neves Reis7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSI) are associated with high morbidity and mortality. This scenario worsens with the emergence of drug-resistant pathogens, resulting in infections which are difficult to treat or even untreatable with conventional antimicrobials. The aim of this study is to describe the epidemiological aspects of BSI caused by multiresistant gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB).Entities:
Keywords: Antibiotic resistance; Bacteremia; Gram-negative bacteria
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31296179 PMCID: PMC6624930 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-4265-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Epidemiological, demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) caused by gram-negative bacteria in tertiary referral hospital in Salvador, Brazil (n = 143)
| Characteristics | MDR | Non-MDR |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demographic data | ||||
| Male sex | 31 (75.6) | 57 (55.9) | 0.03 | 2.45 (1.09–5.52) |
| Age groups (years), median (1 qt–3 qt) | 63 (51–72) | 57 (38–69) | 0.03+ | – |
| 0–15 | 0 (0.0) | 6 (5.9) | 0.12 | – |
| 16–30 | 4 (9.8) | 11 (10.8) | 0.56 | 0.89 (0.26–2.99) |
| 31–59 | 11 (26.8) | 38 (37.3) | 0.23 | 0.61 (0.28–1.37) |
| ≥60 | 26 (63.4) | 47 (46.1) | 0.06 | 2.02 (0.96–4.27) |
| Comorbidities | ||||
| Charlson score, median (1 qt–3 qt) ( | 2.5 (2–4) | 2 (2–3) | 0.10 | – |
| ≥2 ( | 20 (50.0) | 39 (41.5) | 0.37 | 1.41 (0.67–2.97) |
| Congestive heart failure ( | 3 (7.5) | 5 (5.3) | 0.45 | 1.44 (0.33–6.35) |
| Cerebrovascular disease ( | 5 (12.5) | 11 (11.7) | 0.55 | 1.08 (0.35–3.33) |
| Liver disease | 7 (17.5) | 5 (5.3) | 0.02 | 3.78 (1.12–12.73) |
| Kidney disease | 6 (15.0) | 21 (22.3) | 0.33 | 0.61 (0.23–1.66) |
| History of malignancy | 16 (40.0) | 42 (44.7) | 0.62 | 0.82 (0.39–1.76) |
| Metastatic disease | 7 (17.5) | 16 (17.0) | 0.95 | 1.03 (0.39–2.75) |
| HIV/AIDS | 1 (2.5) | 0 (0.0) | 0.12 | – |
| Previous antimicrobial use ( | 29 (70.7) | 51 (50.0) | 0.02 | 2.41 (1.11–5.25) |
| Prophylactic | 8 (19.5) | 21 (20.6) | 0.88 | 0.93 (0.37–2.32) |
| Therapeutic | 26 (63.4) | 43 (42.2) | 0.02 | 2.37 (1.12–5.02) |
| Clinical information | ||||
| Hospitalized in prior 6 months ( | 26 (65.0) | 54 (54.0) | 0.24 | 1.58 (0.74–3.38) |
| Long hospital stay (> 14 days) | 30 (73.2) | 70 (68.6) | 0.59 | 1.2 (0.55–2.79) |
| Users of Health Insurance | 31 (75.6) | 73 (71.6) | 0.62 | 1.23 (0.54–2.94) |
| Type of BSI | ||||
| Primary | 24 (58.5) | 56 (54.9) | 0.69 | 1.16 (0.56–2.41) |
| Secondary ( | 17 (41.5) | 46 (45.1) | 0.69 | 1.16 (0.56–2.41) |
| Urinary tract ( | 7 (41.2) | 22 (45.8) | 0.74 | 0.82 (0.27–2.53) |
| Respiratory tract ( | 5 (29.4) | 12 (25.0) | 0.72 | 1.25 (0.37–4.28) |
| Others ( | 5 (29.4) | 14 (29.2) | 0.98 | 1.02 (0.30–3.41) |
| Location of acquisition | ||||
| Community-associated ( | 1 (2.4) | 5 (4.9) | 0.45 | 0.48 (0.05–4.28) |
| Community-onset, healthcare associated ( | 11 (26.8) | 33 (32.4) | 0.51 | 0.76 (0.34–1.71) |
| Hospital-onset, healthcare associated ( | 29 (70.7) | 64 (62.7) | 0.36 | 1.43 (0.65–3.14) |
| Organisms ( | ||||
| | 12 (24.5) | 38 (31.4) | 0.37 | 0.70 (0.33–1.50) |
| | 27 (55.1) | 23 (19.0) | <0.001 | 5.23 (2.53–0.77) |
| | 1 (2.0) | 14 (11.6) | 0.04 | 0.15 (0.02–1.24) |
| | 3 (6.1) | 10 (8.3) | 0.45 | 0.72 (0.19–2.75) |
| | 2 (4.1) | 10 (8.3) | 0.28 | 0.47 (0.09–2.24) |
| | 4 (8.2) | 2 (1.7) | 0.06 | 5.29 (0.93–9.88) |
| Others*** ( | 0 (0) | 24 (19.8) | <0.001 | – |
| Polymicrobial BSI ( | 9 (18.4) | 13 (10.7) | 0.18 | 1.87 (0.74–4.71) |
(+) Mann-Whitney U Test; (−) Not calculated; (*) Of the 143 patients, 134 had comorbidities according to their Charlson’s score. Regarding diabetes, diabetes with any organ demage, myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease, dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, connective tissue disease, peptic ulcer, hemiplegia or paraplegia and HIV/AIDS data are not shown since the number of patients with those comorbidities were limited (n < 5). None of the mentioned illnesses were risk or protective factor for MDR infection; (**) considering all isolates recovered; (***) Aeromonas hydrophila (n = 4), Burkholderia cepacia (n = 1), Citrobacter koseri (n = 1), Elizabethkingia meningoseptica (n = 1), Enterobacter aerogenes (n = 2), Klebsiella oxytoca (n = 1), Moraxella osloensis (n = 1), Proteus mirabilis (n = 4), Pseudomonas putida (n = 1), Salmonella spp.(n = 1), Sphingomonas paucimobilis (n = 1), and Stenotrophomonas malthophilia (n = 6); (Ω) in the study period 11 polymicrobial episodes were identified, and they involved 22 microbial isolates
Clinical and prognostic characteristics of patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) caused by gram-negative bacteria in tertiary referral hospital in Salvador, Brazil (n = 143)
| Characteristics | MDR | Non-MDR |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Potential risk factors | ||||
| Catheter use ( | 15 (51.7) | 43 (71.7) | 0.06 | 0.42 (0.16–1.06) |
| Ventilator ( | 5 (17.2) | 16 (26.7) | 0.32 | 0.57 (0.18–1.75) |
| Severity of illness | ||||
| Pitt score, median (1 qt–3 qt) | 5 (1–10) | 2 (0–6) | 0.07a | – |
| 0 | 8 (21.6) | 33 (31.1) | 0.27 | 0.61 (0.25–1.48) |
| 1 | 6 (40.0) | 35 (27.3) | 0.31 | 1.77 (0.59–5.34) |
| 2–3 | 4 (14.3) | 37 (32.2) | 0.06 | 0.35 (0.11–1.09) |
| ≥4 | 23 (36.5) | 18 (22.5) | 0.06 | 1.9 (0.95–4.12) |
| Severe sepsis or septic shockb ( | 27 (65.9) | 49 (48.0) | 0.06 | 2.09 (0.99–4.43) |
| Crude mortality | 23 (56.1) | 27 (26.5) | <0.001 | 3.5 (1.65–7.62) |
(a) Mann-Whitney U Test; (b) Sepsis complicated by organ dysfunction is termed severe sepsis, which could progress to septic shock, which is defined as “sepsis-induced hypotension persisting despite adequate fluid resuscitation”
Adjusted odds ratio for independent risk factors for multidrug resistant gram-negative bacteremia based on multivariate logistic regression analysisa
| Risk factors | Adjusted multivariate | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Male sex | 0.02 | 2.98 (1.18–7.47) |
| Age ≥ 60 years old | 0.03 | 2.52 (1.07–5.93) |
| Previous therapeutic antimicrobial use | 0.04 | 2.45 (1.06–5.65) |
| Liver disease | 0.02 | 4.91 (1.25–19.29) |
| Bacteremia by | <0.001 | 4.59 (1.93–70.93) |
(a) Multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model included the following variables: male sex, age ≥ 60 years old, previous therapeutic antimicrobial use, liver disease, catheter use, hospitalization in prior 6 months and bacteremia by K. pneumoniae
Fig. 1Distribution of cases of bloodstream infection (BSI) in a public-private hospital, from 2015 to 2016, based on the location of acquisition and stratified by etiology CA = community-acquired (n = 6), CO-HCA = community-onset, healthcare-associated (n = 44), HO-HCA = hospital-onset, healthcare-associated (n = 93). Others = Aeromonas hydrophila (n = 4), Burkholderia cepacia (n = 1), Citrobacter koseri (n = 1), Elizabethkingia meningoseptica (n = 1), Enterobacter aerogenes (n = 2), Klebsiella oxytoca (n = 1), Moraxella osloensis (n = 1), Proteus mirabilis (n = 4), Pseudomonas putida (n = 1), Salmonella spp. (n = 1), Sphingomonas paucimobilis (n = 1), and Stenotrophomonas malthophilia (n = 6). (n = 143)
Proportions of antimicrobial resistance among Enterobacteriaceae that were most frequently isolated from bloodstream infections
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial drug | No. of isolates | % resistant* | No. of isolates | % resistant* | No. of isolates | % resistant* | No. of isolates | % resistant* |
| Amikacin | – | – | 1 | 2.0 | 1 | 6.7 |
|
|
| Amp-Sul | 28 | 56.0 | 31 | 62.0 | 15 | 100 | 13 | 100 |
| Pip-Tazo | 5** | 10.0** | 21 | 52.0 | 1 | 6.7 | 3 | 23.1 |
| Ceftriaxone | 10 | 20.0 | 25 | 50.0 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Ceftazidime | 10 | 20.0 | 25 | 50.0 | – | – | NA | NA |
| Cefepime | 10 | 20.0 | 25 | 50.0 | 1 | 6.7 | 3 | 23.1 |
| Cefuroxime | 12 | 24.0 | 26 | 52.0 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Imipenem | 2 | 4.0 | 5 | 10.0 | -∆∆ | -∆∆ | 1 | 7.7 |
| Meropenem | 1 | 2.0 | 5 | 10.0 | – | – | 1 | 7.7 |
| Ertapenem | 1 | 2.0 | 5+ | 10.0+ | 1 | 6.7 | 2 | 15.4 |
| Ciprofloxacin | 15 | 30.0 | 23 | 46.0 | 1§ | 6.7§ | 5 | 38.5 |
| Gentamicin | 5*** | 10.0*** | 14 | 28.0 | – | – | 3 | 23.1 |
| Polymyxin | – | – | 1 | 2.0 | 15§§ | 100§§ | 4 | 30.8 |
| Tigecycline | – | – | 4∆ | 8.0∆ | 1Ω | 6.7 Ω | 1 Ω Ω | 7.7 Ω Ω |
*Considered resistant or intermediary profile;** Just 1 isolate of E. coli was not tested against piperacillin-tazobactam; *** Just 1 isolate of E. coli was not tested against gentamicin; +just 1 isolate of K. pneumoniae was not tested against ertapenem; ∆7 isolates of K. pneumoniae were not tested against tigecycline; ∆∆2 isolates of S. marcescens were not tested against imipenem; §2 isolates of S. marcescens were not tested against ciprofloxacin; §§S. marcescens is intrinsically resistant to polymyxin; Ω 1 isolate of S. marcescens were not tested against tigecycline; Ω Ω 3 isolates of E. cloacae were not tested against tigecycline; NA- Not applicable; (−) no resistant microbial isolates
Proportions of antimicrobial resistance among non-fermentative gram-negative bacilli that were most frequently isolated from bloodstream infections
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial drug | No. of isolates | % resistant* | No. of isolates | % resistant* |
| Amikacin | – | – | 1 | 16.7 |
| Aztreonam | 4 | 25 | 1** | 16.7** |
| Amp-Sul | NA | NA | 3*** | 50.0*** |
| Pip-Tazo | 1 | 8.3 | 4 | 66.7 |
| Ceftazidime | 1 | 8.3 | 4 | 66.7 |
| Cefepime | – | – | 4 | 66.7 |
| Imipenem | 3 | 25.0 | 4 | 66.7 |
| Meropenem | 2 | 16.7 | 4 | 66.7 |
| Ciprofloxacin | 1 | 8.3 | 4 | 66.7 |
| Gentamicin | – | – | 2 | 33.3 |
| Polymyxin | – | – | – | – |
| Sulfamethoxazole trimethoprim | NA | NA | 5 | 83.4 |
| Tobramycin | – | – | NA | NA |
| Tigecycline | NA | NA | -**** | -**** |
*Considered resistant or intermediary profile;**just 1 isolate of A. baumannii was tested against aztreonam;*** just 1 isolate of A. baumannii was not tested against ampicillin-sulbactam; *** just 1 isolate of A. baumannii was not tested against tigecycline; NA- Not applicable; and (−) no resistant microbial isolates