4.2 Article

Prevalence and Pathogen Distribution of Neonatal Sepsis Among Very-Low-Birth-Weight Infants

期刊

PEDIATRICS AND NEONATOLOGY
卷 53, 期 4, 页码 228-234

出版社

ELSEVIER TAIWAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.pedneo.2012.06.003

关键词

neonatal intensive care unit; sepsis; very-low-birth-weight infants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Neonatal sepsis contributes to great mortality and morbidity among very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) infants. Prevalence and pathogen distribution of sepsis in the neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) vary with time and geographic location. Such information serves as a guide for selection of empirical antibiotics coverage. Methods: This is a case series study performed by retrospective chart review of VLBW infants (birth body weight, BBW, <1500 g) in a medical center during a 5-year period from January 2005 to December 2009. Episodes of positive blood cultures, pathogen distribution and related clinical manifestations were described. Results: A total of 158 episodes of sepsis were identified from 1042 VLBW infants. Sepsis rate was 152 per 1000 live births. The vast majority of infections (60.7%) were caused by Gram-positive organisms [G(+)], and overall Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) (52.5%) were the most common pathogen identified. Prevalence for early-onset sepsis (EOS) was 1% and for late-onset sepsis (LOS) was 14.2%. Infants with EOS had a much higher case fatality rate than LOS (40% vs. 4.7%). Escherichia coli (40%) were the leading pathogen of EOS while CoNS (54.7%) was the leading pathogens of LOS. Overall, apnea and/or bradycardia and/or cyanosis (65.8%), poor activity (48.7%), and increased respiratory effort (43.0%) were the most common presenting features of sepsis. Conclusion: Unlike term infants, Gram-negative organism and E coli were the leading pathogen of EOS among VLBW infants. Judicious and timely use of antibiotic therapy is crucial in the care of VLBW infants. Copyright (C) 2012, Taiwan Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier Taiwan LLC. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据