4.7 Article

Nosocomial bloodstream infections due to Acinetobacter baumannii, Acinetobacter pittii and Acinetobacter nosocomialis in the United States

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
Volume 64, Issue 3, Pages 282-290

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2011.12.008

Keywords

Multi-drug resistance; Carbapenem resistance; Mortality; Intravascular catheter; Susceptibility

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To compare the clinical features and antimicrobial susceptibilities of the clinically most important Acinetobacter species Acinetobacter baumannii, Acinetobacter pittii (formerly Acinetobacter genomic species 3) and Acinetobacter nosocomialis (formerly Acinetobacter genomic species 13TU). Methods: 295 Acinetobacter isolates collected prospectively from patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) in 52 US hospitals were identified to species level. Clinical and microbiological features were compared between species. Results: A. baumannii (63%) was the most prevalent species, followed by A. nosocomialis (21%), and A. pittii (8%). Intravascular catheters (15.3%) and the respiratory tract (12.9%) were the most frequent sources of BSI. A higher overall mortality was observed in patients with A. baumannii BSI than in patients with BSI caused by A. nosocomialis and A. pittii (36.9% vs. 16.4% and 13.0%, resp., p < 0.001). The most active antimicrobial agents as determined by broth microdilution were tigecycline (99.6% of isolates susceptible), colistin (99.3%), amikacin (98.5%), and imipenem (95.2%). 27 isolates (10.0%) were multi-drug resistant, all but one of these were A. baumannii. Conclusions: About one third of Acinetobacter BSI in our study were caused by A. nosocomialis or A. pittii. Patients with A. baumannii BSI had a less favorable outcome. (C) 2011 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available