4.2 Article

Bacterial colonisation of the endotracheal tube in ventilated very preterm neonates: A retrospective cohort study

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRICS AND CHILD HEALTH
卷 56, 期 10, 页码 1607-1612

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jpc.15046

关键词

bacteria; infant; infection; intratracheal; newborn; respiration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To determine the rate, type and timing of bacterial endotracheal tube (ETT) colonisation in neonates born <32 weeks gestational age (GA); and if bacterial colonisation is associated with chronic lung disease (CLD), septicaemia, length-of-stay or mortality. Methods: All intubated newborns born <32 weeks GA were included. Endotracheal aspirates were routinely obtained three times-per-week. Cohort was divided into three colonisation groups: no growth, normal respiratory flora only, significant bacteria. Logistic regression was performed to identify if ETT bacterial colonisation was associated with CLD, septicaemia or mortality. A general linear model was fitted for length-of-stay. Results: ETT aspirates were sent from 1054 infants: no growth n = 319, only normal respiratory flora n = 357, and significant bacteria n = 378. ETTs became colonised in 70%, most in the first week of life (82%). Most grew normal respiratory flora (642 infants). In those with significant bacteria, 40% grew Gram-negative species;Klebsiellain 34%.Staphylococcus aureusgrew in 104 patients. Adjusted odds ratios for CLD (43% of cohort) compared with no growth were, for normal respiratory flora, 0.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.99) and, for significant bacteria, 0.48 (95% CI 0.24-0.93). With no overall association between colonisation group and CLD in the adjusted model P= 0.07. The odds of septicaemia (10% of cohort) were 4.50 (95% CI 1.98-10.23,P < 0.001) times greater for significant bacteria compared with no growth. No significant associated was found with mortality or length-of-stay. Conclusions: Bacterial colonisation of ETTs is common. It is associated with more septicaemia. There was no significant association with CLD, longer admission or mortality.

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