4.5 Article

Laboratory-based surveillance of patients with bacterial meningitis in Egypt (1998-2004)

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10096-007-0280-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laboratory-based surveillance for bacterial meningitis was conducted in a network of infectious disease hospitals in Egypt to better understand the epidemiology of this infection. Healthcare and laboratory personnel were trained in basic surveillance and microbiologic processing of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens. All bacterial isolates from CSF were confirmed and tested for antimicrobial susceptibility. PCR testing was performed on a random subset of purulent, culture-negative CSF specimens. Of 11,070 patients who met criteria for the case definition, 843 (8%) were culture positive (42% positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae, 20% for Haemophilus influenzae serotype b, 17% for each of Neisseria meningitidis and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and 6% for other bacteria). Of 1,784 (46%) CSF specimens tested by PCR, 232 (13%) were positive for the first three major pathogens. Of N. meningitidis isolates, 52% belonged to serogroup A, 35% to serogroup B, and 4% to serogroup W135. S. pneumoniae isolates comprised 46 different serotypes, of which 6B, 1, 19A, 23F, and 6A were the most predominant. The overall case-fatality rate for culture-positive cases was 26% and was highest among patients with M. tuberculosis (47%). Factors significantly associated with death (p < 0.05) included admission to rural hospitals, long prodromal period, referral from other hospitals, antibiotic treatment prior to admission, and clear CSF (< 100 cells/mm(3)). Susceptibility to ampicillin and ceftriaxone was observed in 44 and 100% of H. influenzae serotype b isolates and in 52 and 94% of S. pneumoniae isolates, respectively. This surveillance highlights the significant mortality and morbidity associated with bacterial meningitis in Egypt. Decision makers need to review current treatment guidelines and introduce appropriate vaccines for prevention and control of the disease.

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