4.5 Article

Risk factors for extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Serratia marcescens and Klebsiella pneumoniae acquisition in a neonatal intensive care unit

期刊

JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION
卷 67, 期 2, 页码 135-141

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2007.07.026

关键词

nosocomial infections; antimicrobial resistances; genotyping; horizontal gene transfer; risk factor analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the molecular epidemiology of gentamicin-resistant, extended -spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) -producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and Serratia marcescens, and risk factors associated with their acquisition in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of a university hospital in Italy. During the study period (April-November 2004), S. marcescens was responsible for six infections and 31 colonisations, while K. pneumoniae was responsible for six infections and 103 colonisations. Concurrent isolation of both organisms occurred in 24 neonates. Molecular typing identified one major pulsed-field get electrophoresis pattern each for S. marcescens and K. pneumoniae strains isolated during the study period. An 80 kb plasmid containing bla(SHV-12), bla(TEM-1) and aac(6')-lb genes, isolated from both S. marcescens and K. pneumoniae strains, and showing identical restriction profiles, transferred resistance to third-generation cephalosporins to a previously susceptible Escherichia coli host. Birthweight, gestational age and use of invasive devices were significantly associated with S. marcescens and K. pneumoniae acquisition on univariate analysis, while empiric antimicrobial treatment with ampicillin and gentamicin, and duration of hospital stay, proved to be the only independent risk factors. In conclusion, conjugal plasmid transfer and empiric antimicrobial therapy with ampicillin and gentamicin might have contributed to the selection and spread of gentamicin-resistant ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in the NICU. (C) 2007 The Hospital Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.5
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