4.6 Review

Update on Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci-What the Clinician Should Know

期刊

MICROORGANISMS
卷 9, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9040830

关键词

coagulase-negative staphylococci; hospital-acquired infections; foreign body-related infections

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)
  2. Saarland University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are common pathogens in clinical care, particularly affecting preterm neonates and patients with implanted medical devices. Challenges in correctly identifying CoNS infections remain a major diagnostic hurdle.
Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are among the most frequently recovered bacteria in routine clinical care. Their incidence has steadily increased over the past decades in parallel to the advancement in medicine, especially in regard to the utilization of foreign body devices. Many new species have been described within the past years, while clinical information to most of those species is still sparse. In addition, interspecies differences that render some species more virulent than others have to be taken into account. The distinct populations in which CoNS infections play a prominent role are preterm neonates, patients with implanted medical devices, immunodeficient patients, and those with other relevant comorbidities. Due to the property of CoNS to colonize the human skin, contamination of blood cultures or other samples occurs frequently. Hence, the main diagnostic hurdle is to correctly identify the cases in which CoNS are causative agents rather than contaminants. However, neither phenotypic nor genetic tools have been able to provide a satisfying solution to this problem. Another dilemma of CoNS in clinical practice pertains to their extensive antimicrobial resistance profile, especially in healthcare settings. Therefore, true infections caused by CoNS most often necessitate the use of second-line antimicrobial drugs.

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

4.6
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