Causative agents and outcome of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhotic patients: community-acquired versus nosocomial infections.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anti-Bacterial Agents
/ pharmacology
Community-Acquired Infections
/ diagnosis
Cross Infection
/ diagnosis
Drug Resistance, Bacterial
/ drug effects
Enterococcus
/ drug effects
Escherichia coli
/ drug effects
Female
Humans
Klebsiella pneumoniae
/ drug effects
Liver Cirrhosis
/ complications
Male
Middle Aged
Peritonitis
/ complications
Retrospective Studies
Survival Rate
Young Adult
Community-acquired
Liver cirrhosis
Nosocomial
Outcome
Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis
Journal
BMC infectious diseases
ISSN: 1471-2334
Titre abrégé: BMC Infect Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 May 2019
23 May 2019
Historique:
received:
11
06
2018
accepted:
16
05
2019
entrez:
25
5
2019
pubmed:
28
5
2019
medline:
10
7
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a serious complication and common cause of death in patients with liver cirrhosis. This study was conducted to compare the microbiological characteristics, drug resistance, and treatment outcomes for nosocomial SBP and community-acquired SBP. A retrospective study was performed on 334 patients with culture-positive SBP at Beijing Youan Hospital, China, between January 2012 and December 2016. The medical records for these patients were reviewed, and their clinical and laboratory data were analyzed. A total of 155 (46.4%) patients with nosocomial SBP and 179 (53.6%) with community-acquired SBP were included in this study. From the patients' ascitic fluids, 334 pathogenic strains, including 178 Gram-negative bacterial strains, 138 Gram-positive bacterial strains and 18 other microbial strains were isolated. E. coli was the major pathogen (24.3%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (12.0%) and Enterococcus faecium (10.5%). The proportion of Enterococcus was significantly higher in the patients with nosocomial SBP (6.1% vs. 27.7%, P < 0.001) than in the patients with community-acquired SBP. The main pathogens isolated from the nosocomial infections were significantly more resistant to the first-line recommended drug. Compared with community-acquired SBP, nosocomial SBP had a poorer outcome (36.8% vs. 24.6%; P = 0.016). The independent predictors for 30-day mortality included nosocomial infection, Child-Pugh classification, hepatocellular carcinoma, renal failure and hepatic encephalopathy. Gram-negative bacteria were the major pathogens involved in SBP in the cirrhotic patients. The strains isolated from the patients with nosocomial SBP displayed higher drug resistance than those isolated from patients with community-acquired SBP. Compared with community-acquired SBP, nosocomial SBP had a poorer outcome. When choosing drug treatments, the acquisition site of infection and the local epidemiological situation should be taken into account.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a serious complication and common cause of death in patients with liver cirrhosis. This study was conducted to compare the microbiological characteristics, drug resistance, and treatment outcomes for nosocomial SBP and community-acquired SBP.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective study was performed on 334 patients with culture-positive SBP at Beijing Youan Hospital, China, between January 2012 and December 2016. The medical records for these patients were reviewed, and their clinical and laboratory data were analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 155 (46.4%) patients with nosocomial SBP and 179 (53.6%) with community-acquired SBP were included in this study. From the patients' ascitic fluids, 334 pathogenic strains, including 178 Gram-negative bacterial strains, 138 Gram-positive bacterial strains and 18 other microbial strains were isolated. E. coli was the major pathogen (24.3%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (12.0%) and Enterococcus faecium (10.5%). The proportion of Enterococcus was significantly higher in the patients with nosocomial SBP (6.1% vs. 27.7%, P < 0.001) than in the patients with community-acquired SBP. The main pathogens isolated from the nosocomial infections were significantly more resistant to the first-line recommended drug. Compared with community-acquired SBP, nosocomial SBP had a poorer outcome (36.8% vs. 24.6%; P = 0.016). The independent predictors for 30-day mortality included nosocomial infection, Child-Pugh classification, hepatocellular carcinoma, renal failure and hepatic encephalopathy.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Gram-negative bacteria were the major pathogens involved in SBP in the cirrhotic patients. The strains isolated from the patients with nosocomial SBP displayed higher drug resistance than those isolated from patients with community-acquired SBP. Compared with community-acquired SBP, nosocomial SBP had a poorer outcome. When choosing drug treatments, the acquisition site of infection and the local epidemiological situation should be taken into account.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31122192
doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-4102-4
pii: 10.1186/s12879-019-4102-4
pmc: PMC6533661
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
463Références
J Hepatol. 2000;32(1 Suppl):157-70
pubmed: 10728802
Gastroenterology. 2001 Feb;120(3):726-48
pubmed: 11179247
Hepatology. 2002 Jan;35(1):140-8
pubmed: 11786970
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2003 Jan;22(1):10-5
pubmed: 12582738
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2003 Jun;9(6):531-7
pubmed: 12848729
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003 Aug;18(8):927-33
pubmed: 12859722
J Korean Med Sci. 2006 Aug;21(4):666-71
pubmed: 16891810
World J Gastroenterol. 2008 May 7;14(17):2757-62
pubmed: 18461661
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008 Oct;4(5):919-25
pubmed: 19209274
Clin Infect Dis. 2009 May 1;48(9):1230-6
pubmed: 19302016
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Sep;24(9):1494-503
pubmed: 19743995
Scand J Infect Dis. 2009;41(11-12):847-51
pubmed: 19922067
Gut Liver. 2009 Sep;3(3):197-204
pubmed: 20431746
Gastroenterology. 2010 Oct;139(4):1246-56, 1256.e1-5
pubmed: 20558165
J Hepatol. 2010 Sep;53(3):397-417
pubmed: 20633946
J Hepatol. 2012 Apr;56(4):825-32
pubmed: 22173153
Yonsei Med J. 2012 Mar;53(2):328-36
pubmed: 22318820
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Nov;10(11):1291-8
pubmed: 22902776
Gastroenterology. 2013 Jun;144(7):1426-37, 1437.e1-9
pubmed: 23474284
Liver Int. 2013 Aug;33(7):975-81
pubmed: 23522099
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Feb;28(2):83-8
pubmed: 24288693
Int J Hepatol. 2014;2014:917856
pubmed: 24778884
World J Hepatol. 2015 Mar 27;7(3):304-14
pubmed: 25848460
Hepatol Int. 2013 Mar;7(1):72-9
pubmed: 26201623
World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Sep 28;21(36):10409-17
pubmed: 26420967
Sci Rep. 2017 Apr 06;7:46025
pubmed: 28382951
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Mar;30(3):329-336
pubmed: 29303883
J Hepatol. 2018 Aug;69(2):406-460
pubmed: 29653741
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2018 Aug;19(12):1317-1325
pubmed: 30071176