Journals / Haseki Tıp Bülteni / 2016 / Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 2

Antimicrobial Susceptibility and Microorganisms Isolated from Blood Cultures of Hospitalized Patients in Intensive Care Units

Yoğun Bakım Ünitelerinde Yatan Hastaların Kan Kültürlerinden İzole Edilen Mikroorganizmalar ve Antimikrobiyal Duyarlılıkları

Pages
97–102
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusions: We assume that infection control measures must be increased due to high antibiotic resistance and besides, antibiotic policies should be improved.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim:­The aim of this study was to evaluate microorganism growth in blood cultures of hospitalized patients in our intensive care units and to determine appropriate antimicrobial agents for treatment.Methods: We retrospectively investigated the blood cultures obtained from the patients hospitalized in the Coronary and Surgical Intensive Care Units at the Institute of Cardiology, İstanbul University, between July 2013 and December 2014.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results:­ A total of 1034 blood cultures were obtained from 324 patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions: We assume that infection control measures must be increased due to high antibiotic resistance and besides, antibiotic policies should be improved.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim:­The aim of this study was to evaluate microorganism growth in blood cultures of hospitalized patients in our intensive care units and to determine appropriate antimicrobial agents for treatment.Methods: We retrospectively investigated the blood cultures obtained from the patients hospitalized in the Coronary and Surgical Intensive Care Units at the Institute of Cardiology, İstanbul University, between July 2013 and December 2014. All microorganisms were identified using the conventional methods. Results:­ A total of 1034 blood cultures were obtained from 324 patients. Microbial growth was detected in 174 (16.8%) blood cultures of 68 patients. Among all microbial growth, 113 (58.55%) were gram-positive bacteria, 69 (35.75%) were gram-negative rods and 11 (5.7%) were fungi. Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequent microorganism (48; 24.87%), followed by coagulasenegative Staphylococci (35; 18,13%), Enterococcus spp. (30; 15,54%), Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas spp. 60.4% of Staphylococcus aureus were methicillin-resistant and 65.7% of coagulase-negative Staphylococci were also methicillinresistant. All Staphylococci and Enterococci were not resistant to vancomycin, teicoplanin and tigecycline. All the gram-negative rods were susceptible to colistin and tigecycline, followed by imipenem (71.6%) and meropenem (70.7%). Conclusions: We assume that infection control measures must be increased due to high antibiotic resistance and besides, antibiotic policies should be improved.

Özet

Amaç:­ Çalışmamızda, yoğun bakım ünitelerimizde yatan hastaların kan kültürlerinde üreyen mikroorganizmaların değerlendirilmesi ve tedavi için uygun antimikrobiyal ajanların saptanması amaçlandı. Yöntemler:­ Temmuz 2013-Aralık 2014 tarihleri arasında İstanbul Üniversitesi Kardiyoloji Enstitüsü Koroner ve Cerrahi Yoğun Bakım Üniteleri'nde yatan hastalardan elde edilen kan kültürleri retrospektif olarak incelendi. Bütün mikroorganizmalar konvansiyonel metodlarla identifiye edildi.Bulgular: Üç yüz yirmi dört hastadan toplam 1034 kan kültürü elde edildi. Altmış sekiz hastaya ait 174 (%16,8) kan kültüründe üreme oldu. Üreyen mikroorganizmaların 113'ü (%58,55) gram pozitif bakteriler, 69'u (%35,75) gram negatif çomaklar ve 11'ini (%5,7) Candida cinsi mayalar oluşturmakta idi. En sık üreyen mikroorganizma Staphylococcus aureus (48; %24,87) idi. Bunu koagülaz negatif stafilokok (35; %18,13), enterokok (30; %15,54), Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas cinsi gram negatif çomaklar izledi. Staphylococcus aures'ta metisilin direnci %60,4 ve koagülaz negatif stafilokoklarda ise %65,7 idi. Enterokok ve stafilokoklarda vankomisin, teikoplanin ve tigesiklin direncine rastlanmadı. Gram negatif çomakların hepsi kolitsine ve tigesikline duyarlı idi. Bu duyarlılığı imipenem (%71,6) ve meropenem (%70,7) izledi.Sonuç: Yüksek antibiyotik direnci nedeniyle, enfeksiyon kontrol önlemlerinin arttırılması ve antibiyotik kullanım politikalarının geliştirilmesi gerektiğini düşünmekteyiz.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÜÇÜKATEŞ, E., GÜLTEKİN, N. (2016). Antimicrobial Susceptibility and Microorganisms Isolated from Blood Cultures of Hospitalized Patients in Intensive Care Units. Haseki Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 2, 97–102. https://ajindex.com/articles/212390

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Ding JG, Sun QF, Li KC, et al. Retrospective analysis of nosocomial infections in the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in China during 2003 and 2007. BMC Infect Dis 2009;9:115-9
  2. Esel D, Doganay M, Alp E, Sumerkan B. Prospective evaluation of blood cultures in a Turkish University hospital: epidemiology, microbiology and patient outcome. Clin Microbiol Infect 2003;9:1038-44
  3. Mitt P, Adamson V, Loivukene K, et al. Epidemiology of nosocomial bloodstream infections in Estonia. J Hosp Infect 2009;71:365-70
  4. Ribas RM, Freitas C, Gontijo Filho PP. Nosocomial bloodstream infections: organisims, risk factors and resistant phenotypes in the Brazilian University Hospital. Braz J Infect Dis 2007;11:351-4
  5. Correa L, Pittet D. Problems and solutions in hospital-acquired bacteremia. J Hosp İnfect 2000;46:89-95
  6. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM, Schreckenberger PC, Winn WC. Diagnostic Microbiology, 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1997
  7. Clinical and Laboratory standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, Eighteenth Informational Supplement M100-S18, CLSI, Wayne, Pa 2008
  8. Corona A, Wilson AP, Grassi M, Singer M. Prospective audit of bacteraemia management in a university hospital ICU using a general strategy of short-course monotherapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004;54:809-17
  9. Laupland KB, Gregson DB, Zygun DA, Doig CJ, Mortis G, Church DL. Severe bloodstream infections: a populationbased assessment. Crit Care Med 2004;32:992-7
  10. Stohl S, Benenson S, Sviri S, et al. Blood cultures at central line insertion in the intensive care unit: comparison with peripheral venipuncture. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:2398-403
  11. Blot S, Cankurtaran M, Petrovic M, et al. Epidemiology and outcome of nosocomial bloodstream infection in elderly critically ill patients: a comparison between middle-aged, old, and very old patients. Crit Care Med 2009;37:1634-41
  12. Vicent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, et al. International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA 2009;302:2323-9
  13. Culshaw N, Glover G, Whiteley C, et al. Healthcare-associated bloodstream infections in critically ill patients: descriptive cross-sectional database study evaluating concordance with clinical site isolates. Annals Intensive Care 2014;4:34
  14. Gülmez D, Gür D. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İhsan Doğramacı Çocuk hastanesinde 2000-2011 yılları arasında kan kültürlerinde izole edilen mikroorganizma