切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版) ›› 2017, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (06) : 573 -577. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1358.2017.06.010

临床论著

48例厌氧菌血流感染的临床特点及耐药性分析
王艳1, 张会英1, 吴俊1,(), 刘颖1, 梁倩1   
  1. 1. 100035 北京,北京积水潭医院检验科
  • 收稿日期:2016-11-18 出版日期:2017-12-15
  • 通信作者: 吴俊
  • 基金资助:
    北京积水潭医院"学科新星"计划专项经费(No. XKXX201613)

Clinical characteristics and drug resistance of 48 cases with anaerobic bloodstream infections

Yan Wang1, Huiying Zhang1, Jun Wu1,(), Ying Liu1, Qian Liang1   

  1. 1. The Department of Clinical Laboratory, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100035, China
  • Received:2016-11-18 Published:2017-12-15
  • Corresponding author: Jun Wu
引用本文:

王艳, 张会英, 吴俊, 刘颖, 梁倩. 48例厌氧菌血流感染的临床特点及耐药性分析[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(06): 573-577.

Yan Wang, Huiying Zhang, Jun Wu, Ying Liu, Qian Liang. Clinical characteristics and drug resistance of 48 cases with anaerobic bloodstream infections[J]. Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Infectious Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2017, 11(06): 573-577.

目的

探讨厌氧菌血流感染的临床特点及耐药性,提高厌氧菌血流感染的诊断和治疗。

方法

选取2012年1月至2015年12月本院48例厌氧菌血流感染者为研究对象,分析患者临床特征、细菌种类及耐药性。

结果

消化系统疾病和外科术后感染是厌氧菌血流感染的主要原因。共检出53株厌氧菌,革兰阳性和革兰阴性厌氧菌的比例分别为47.17%和52.83%,其中消化链球菌属占20.75%,脆弱拟杆菌占15.09%,其他拟杆菌属占22.64%。革兰阴性厌氧菌的报阳时间多在48 h以内,早于革兰阳性厌氧菌。53株厌氧菌中对哌拉西林/他唑巴坦、亚胺培南和万古霉素均100.00%敏感;拟杆菌属中仅7株对青霉素敏感,敏感率为35.00%和13株对克林霉素敏感,敏感率为65.00%;8株革兰阳性厌氧杆菌和12株革兰阳性厌氧球菌对甲硝唑敏感,敏感率分别为63.64%和85.71%。

结论

厌氧菌血流感染以革兰阴性菌为主,血培养是临床厌氧菌感染的主要检测手段,加强厌氧菌监测和抗菌药物敏感试验可有效降低厌氧菌血流感染的发生率和病死率。

Objective

To investigate the clinical characterisitics and the resistance of anaerobic bloodstream infections and to improve the diagnosis and treatment in anaerobic bacteremia.

Methods

Total of 48 cases with anaerobic bloodstream infections in our hospital were collected from January 2012 to November 2015. The clinical characterisitics, pathogens distribution and drug resistance were analyzed, respectively.

Results

The most pathogenesis of anaerobic bloodstream infections were gastrointestinal tract diseases and surgical site infections. Total of 53 strains anaerobic bacteria were isolated, and the detection rates of Gram-positive and Gram-negative anaerobic bacteria were 47.17% and 52.83%, which included Peptostreptococcus spp. (20.75%), Bacteroides fragilis (15.09%) and other Bacteroides spp. (22.64%). The positive alarming time within 48 h of Gram-negative anaerobic bacteria was significantly shorter than that of Gram-positive anaerobic bacteria. Among the 53 strains anaerobic bacteria, 100.00% were susceptible to pipperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem and vancomycin. Only 7 isolates of Bacteroides spp. were susceptible to penicillin (35.00%), 11 isolates were susceptible to clindamycin (65.00%). Eight isolates of Gram-positive bacilli (66.67%) and 11 isolates of Gram-positive cocci (86.67%) were susceptible to metronidazoleand.

Conclusions

The anaerobic bloodstream infections were majored in Gram-negative bacilli. Blood culture played a significant role in anaerobic blood infections. It was important to increase the detection rates of anaerobic bacteria and provide the antimicrobial susceptibility testing in order to reduce the incidence and mortality of anaerobic bloodstream infections.

表1 48例厌氧菌血流感染者的临床特征
表2 厌氧菌的血流感染情况
表3 厌氧菌的血培养仪报阳时间分布[株(%)]
表4 厌氧菌对抗菌药物的敏感率[株(%)]
[1]
刘德华, 张红娟, 杜艳, 等. 14 519例血流感染病原菌构成及耐药分析[J]. 中国抗生素杂志,2016,41(2):137-143.
[2]
Umemura T, Hamada Y, Yamagishi Y, et al. Clinical characteristics associated with mortality of patients with anaerobic bacteremia[J]. Anaerobe,2016,39(2):45-50.
[3]
翟如波, 李云慧, 孙跃岭, 等. 某院连续三年医院血流感染病原菌分布特征及耐药性分析[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版),2016,10(1):36-40.
[4]
Brook I. The role of anaerobic bacteria in bacteremia[J]. Anaerobe,2010,16(3):183-189.
[5]
于清华, 陈安青, 罗玮. 血培养病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版),2015,9(4):531-535.
[6]
中华人民共和国卫生部. 医院感染诊断标准(试行)[J]. 中华医学杂志,2001,81(5):314-320.
[7]
Robert R, Deraignac A, Le Moal G, et al. Prognostic factors and impact of antibiotherapy in 117 cases of anaerobic bacteremia [J]. Clin Microbiol Infect Dis,2008,27(8):671-678.
[8]
尚红, 王毓三, 申子瑜. 全国临床经验操作规程[M]. 4版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社,2015,629-631.
[9]
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 25th informational supplement. CLSI document M100-S25[M]. Wayne,PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute,2015.
[10]
王左, 蒋栋能. 厌氧菌内源性感染的临床研究进展[J]. 检验医学与临床,2010,7(14):1517-1519.
[11]
Ngo JT, Parkins MD, Gregson DB, et al. Population-based assessment of the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of anaerobic bloodstream infections[J]. Infection,2013,41(1):41-48.
[12]
Umemura T, Hamada Y, Yamagishi Y, et al. Clinical characteristics associated with morality of patients with anaerobic bacteremia[J]. Anaerobe,2016,39(1):45-50.
[13]
Mishra R, Sinha N, Duncalf R. Beta lactamase producing Clostridium perfringens bacteremia in an elderly man with acute pancreatitis[J]. Case Rep Crit Care,2016,7078180.
[14]
Lassmann B, Gustafson DR, Wood CM, et al. Reemergence of anaerobic bacteremia[J]. Clin Infect Dis,2007,44(7):895-900.
[15]
周春妹, 胡必杰, 谢红梅, 等. 质控督查对血培养双套送检率的影响[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2010,20(12):1813-1814.
[16]
Keukeleire D, Wybol S, Naessens A, et al. Anaerobic bacteraemia: a 10-year retrospective epidemiological survey[J]. Anaerobe,2016,39(6):54-59.
[17]
Ng LS, Kwang LL, Rao S, et al. Anaerobic bacteraemia revisited: species and susceptibilities[J]. Ann Acad Med Singapore,2015,44(1):13-18.
[18]
毛小琴, 周光, 赵梅, 等. 血培养仪阳性报警标本的多参数分析[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2014,24(22):5519-5521.
[19]
Boyanova L, Kolarov R, Mitov I. Recent evolution of antibiotic resistance in the anaerobes as compared to previous decades[J]. Anaerobe,2015,31(2):4-10.
[20]
Shilnikova II, Dmitrieva NA. Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility of Bacteroides, Preotella and Fusobacterium species isolated from patients of the N.N.Blokhin Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia[J]. Anaerobe,2015,31(2):15-18.
[21]
Eitel Z, Soki J, Urban E, et al. The prevalence of antibiotic resistance genes in Bacteroides fragilis group strains isolated in different European countries[J]. Anaerobe,2013,21(6):43-49.
[22]
Anita N, Zana R, Varja D, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of clinically isolated anaerobic bacteria in a university hospital centre split, Croatia in 2013[J]. Anaerobe,2015,31(2):31-36.
[23]
Shan NB, Tande AJ, Patel R, et al. Anaerobic prosthetic joint infection[J]. Anaerobe,2015,36(9):1-8.
[24]
Karlowsky JA, Walkty AJ, Adam HJ, et al. Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among clinical isolates of Bacteroides fragilis group in Canada in 2010-2011: CANWARD surveillance study[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother,2012,56(3):1247-1252.
[1] 王雪菲, 海琳悦, 李立方, 肖春花. Luminal A型乳腺癌的内分泌治疗与化疗[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 294-300.
[2] 赵洪峰, 王淑颖, 胡炜, 聂世姣, 费莹, 石尚世, 储华英, 王剑荣. 体外膜肺氧合相关血流感染危险因素及预测模型建立[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(02): 98-104.
[3] 涂家金, 廖武强, 刘金晶, 涂志鹏, 毛远桂. 严重烧伤患者鲍曼不动杆菌血流感染的危险因素及预后分析[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 491-497.
[4] 范帅华, 郭伟, 郭军. 基于机器学习的决策树算法在血流感染预后预测中应用现状及展望[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 289-293.
[5] 武元星, 任建伟, 朱光发. 181例心脏外科患者发生血流感染危险因素分析[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 230-237.
[6] 张海金, 王增国, 蔡慧君, 赵炳彤. 2020至2022年西安市儿童医院新生儿细菌感染分布及耐药监测分析[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 222-229.
[7] 魏芳芳, 胡浩, 黄丽华, 韩旻雁, 姚麟. 某院2016~2020年泌尿外科多重耐药病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 320-324.
[8] 刘法永, 胡萍, 戴丽. 获得性肺炎患者血流感染病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(05): 666-669.
[9] 谭自明, 罗琼, 张美, 王君. 小儿病毒性脑炎并发肺部感染的病原菌及耐药性分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(03): 394-396.
[10] 黎金秋, 韦晓芳, 王成玉. 腹膜透析相关性腹膜炎细菌谱变迁及药敏分析[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2022, 11(05): 264-269.
[11] 杨艳丽, 陈昱, 赵若辰, 杜伟, 马海娟, 许珂, 张莉芸. 系统性红斑狼疮合并血流感染的危险因素及细菌学分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 694-699.
[12] 王晓苏, 戴铮, 朱嘉嘉, 李启超, 张李涛. BacT/ALERT两种血培养系统8种血培养瓶对模拟菌血症标本检测能力的对比研究[J]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2023, 11(04): 207-213.
[13] 林舒楠, 党文强, 钟天, 梁斯欣, 张磊, 唐晓华, 袁文常. 2017—2021年广东地区基层医疗机构金黄色葡萄球菌临床分离株耐药谱分析[J]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 139-144,150.
[14] 胡晓蓉, 李小龙, 欧阳娟, 何思雨, 宋江勤. 不同吸附介质培养瓶的报阳时间及抗菌药物吸附性能的临床评估[J]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 84-89,94.
[15] 刁福强, 罗欣, 古春明, 唐玲玲. 广州某医院儿童社区获得性肺炎病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2023, 11(01): 38-44.
阅读次数
全文


摘要