4.2 Article

High antimicrobial resistant rates among Gram-negative pathogens in intensive care units A retrospective study at a tertiary care hospital in Southwest Saudi Arabia

期刊

SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 39, 期 10, 页码 1035-1043

出版社

SAUDI MED J
DOI: 10.15537/smj.2018.10.22944

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To determine the distribution and resistance profiles of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) in intensive care units (ICUs) at King Abdullah Hospital in Bisha, Saudi Arabia. Methods: A record based retrospective study was conducted from December 2016 to January 2018. In total, 3736 non-duplicate clinical specimens from the general intensive care unit (ICU), neonatal ICU (NICU), and coronary CU (CCU) were analyzed for pathogens. Results: Of 3736 specimens, 9.6% (358) were positive for pathogens, and GNB constituted the majority (290/358; 81%). Acinetobacter is predominant in the general ICU, whereas Klebsiella pneumoniae is common in the NICU and CCU. Overall, GNB revealed a high resistance rate for cefuroxime (75.8%) trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (73.4%), cefotaxime (72.9%), aztreonam (64.6%), piperacillin (62.1%), and ciprofloxacin (61.5%). Acinetobacter revealed a high resistance (93.4% to 97.5%) to all antimicrobials except colistin (4%). Klebsiella pneumoniae showed a high resistance to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (71.8%), cefotaxime (71.4%) and aztreonam (65.2%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa showed good activity for aminoglycosides but increasing resistance for cephalosporins and meropenem. GNB exhibited a high rate of multi-drug-resistant (MDR) phenotypes (67.9%) with a higher level among Acinetobacter spp. (97.5%). There were no significant differences in the resistance rates of GNB from different ICUs except for imipenem (p=0.002) and ciprofloxacin (p=0.003). Conclusions: Increased antimicrobial resistance with high proportions of MDR patterns were found among GNB from ICUs. Comprehensive surveillance programs are needed to track the origins and emergence pathways of resistant pathogens.

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