Epidemiology and risk factors for multi-drug resistant hospital-acquired urinary tract infection in patients with liver cirrhosis: single center experience in Serbia.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anti-Bacterial Agents
/ therapeutic use
Cephalosporins
/ therapeutic use
Cross Infection
/ epidemiology
Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial
Enterococcus
/ isolation & purification
Escherichia coli
/ isolation & purification
Female
Humans
Klebsiella
/ isolation & purification
Liver Cirrhosis
/ complications
Male
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Serbia
/ epidemiology
Urinary Tract Infections
/ epidemiology
Immune dysfunction
Liver cirrhosis
Multi-drug resistant organism
Urinary tract infection
Journal
BMC infectious diseases
ISSN: 1471-2334
Titre abrégé: BMC Infect Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Feb 2019
12 Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
21
01
2018
accepted:
30
01
2019
entrez:
14
2
2019
pubmed:
14
2
2019
medline:
26
3
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cirrhosis-associated immune dysfunction syndrome (CAIDS) has been identified in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC), predisposing them to a wide variety of infections. In patients with LC, healthcare-associated infections involving multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria have increased significantly over the last decades. Among them, hospital-acquired urinary tract infections (HA-UTI) are the most common. This study aimed to investigate the rates of antimicrobial resistance among patients with LC and HA-UTI and to determine risk factors associated with their development among patients hospitalized in tertiary care facility in Serbia. This retrospective study included 65 hospitalized patients with LC who had developed HA-UTI. We examined the epidemiology of these infections concerning resistance to the most commonly used antimicrobials and patient-specific risk factors associated with HA-UTI development by MDR pathogens. The most frequently isolated organisms were Enterococcus spp. (n = 34, 52.3%), Klebsiella spp. (n = 10, 15.4%), and E.coli (n = 6, 9.2%). Thirty-five isolates (53.8%) were identified as MDR, and 30 (46.2%) were non-MDR.We found a statistically significant difference in the distribution of MDR and non-MDR strains, based on Gram staining, with the majority of Gram-negative pathogens being MDR (p = 0.005). We identified age ≥ 65 years (p = 0.007), previous use of cephalosporins as empiric therapy (p = 0.042), and the presence of hepatic encephalopathy (p = 0.011) as independent risk factors for the development of MDR UTIs. This is the first study from Serbia and the Balkans concerning the changing epidemiology of MDR UTI in patients with LC. Our study showed that more than half of HA-UTI was caused by MDR and the most common pathogen was Enterococcus spp. The overall resistance to ceftriaxone was 92%. Our findings underscore the need for institutions to individualize protocols for treatment of hospital-acquired infections, particularly in immunocompromised populations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cirrhosis-associated immune dysfunction syndrome (CAIDS) has been identified in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC), predisposing them to a wide variety of infections. In patients with LC, healthcare-associated infections involving multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria have increased significantly over the last decades. Among them, hospital-acquired urinary tract infections (HA-UTI) are the most common. This study aimed to investigate the rates of antimicrobial resistance among patients with LC and HA-UTI and to determine risk factors associated with their development among patients hospitalized in tertiary care facility in Serbia.
METHODS
METHODS
This retrospective study included 65 hospitalized patients with LC who had developed HA-UTI. We examined the epidemiology of these infections concerning resistance to the most commonly used antimicrobials and patient-specific risk factors associated with HA-UTI development by MDR pathogens.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The most frequently isolated organisms were Enterococcus spp. (n = 34, 52.3%), Klebsiella spp. (n = 10, 15.4%), and E.coli (n = 6, 9.2%). Thirty-five isolates (53.8%) were identified as MDR, and 30 (46.2%) were non-MDR.We found a statistically significant difference in the distribution of MDR and non-MDR strains, based on Gram staining, with the majority of Gram-negative pathogens being MDR (p = 0.005). We identified age ≥ 65 years (p = 0.007), previous use of cephalosporins as empiric therapy (p = 0.042), and the presence of hepatic encephalopathy (p = 0.011) as independent risk factors for the development of MDR UTIs.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first study from Serbia and the Balkans concerning the changing epidemiology of MDR UTI in patients with LC. Our study showed that more than half of HA-UTI was caused by MDR and the most common pathogen was Enterococcus spp. The overall resistance to ceftriaxone was 92%. Our findings underscore the need for institutions to individualize protocols for treatment of hospital-acquired infections, particularly in immunocompromised populations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30755176
doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-3761-5
pii: 10.1186/s12879-019-3761-5
pmc: PMC6373165
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Cephalosporins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
141Références
Dig Liver Dis. 2001 Jan-Feb;33(1):41-8
pubmed: 11303974
Epidemiol Infect. 2001 Dec;127(3):443-50
pubmed: 11811877
Int J Clin Pract. 2003 Jun;57(5):388-91
pubmed: 12846343
Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Apr 15;38(8):1150-8
pubmed: 15095222
Microb Drug Resist. 2004 Summer;10(2):160-8
pubmed: 15256032
J Hepatol. 2006 Jan;44(1):217-31
pubmed: 16298014
Infection. 2009 Feb;37(1):2-8
pubmed: 19169633
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2009 Aug;34 Suppl 3:S14-9
pubmed: 19596109
Gastroenterology. 2010 Oct;139(4):1246-56, 1256.e1-5
pubmed: 20558165
J Hepatol. 2010 Sep;53(3):397-417
pubmed: 20633946
Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Mar 1;52(5):e103-20
pubmed: 21292654
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011 Sep;9(9):727-38
pubmed: 21397731
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Mar;18(3):268-81
pubmed: 21793988
Hepatology. 2012 May;55(5):1551-61
pubmed: 22183941
Gut. 2012 Aug;61(8):1219-25
pubmed: 22661495
Hepatology. 2012 Dec;56(6):2305-15
pubmed: 22753144
Liver Int. 2013 Feb;33(2):220-30
pubmed: 23295053
Gastroenterology. 2013 Jun;144(7):1426-37, 1437.e1-9
pubmed: 23474284
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Mar 14;20(10):2542-54
pubmed: 24627590
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014 Jul;40(1):105-12
pubmed: 24832591
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014 Oct;20(10):949-53
pubmed: 25040923
J Hepatol. 2015 Apr;62(4):831-40
pubmed: 25463539
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015 May;13(5):269-84
pubmed: 25853778
World J Hepatol. 2015 May 8;7(7):916-21
pubmed: 25954474
PLoS One. 2015 May 21;10(5):e0127448
pubmed: 25996499
World J Hepatol. 2016 Feb 28;8(6):307-21
pubmed: 26962397
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Apr;112(4):588-596
pubmed: 28220780