-
JAC-antimicrobial Resistance Feb 2023Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) causes substantial health and economic burden to individuals, healthcare systems and societies globally. Understanding the temporal... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) causes substantial health and economic burden to individuals, healthcare systems and societies globally. Understanding the temporal relationship between antibiotic consumption and antibiotic resistance in hospitalized patients can better inform antibiotic stewardship activities and the time frame for their evaluation.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review examined the temporal relationship between antibiotic use and development of antibiotic resistance for 42 pre-defined antibiotic and pathogen combinations in hospitalized adults in Europe.
METHODS
Searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and NIHR Centre for Reviews and Dissemination were undertaken from 2000 to August 2021. Pathogens of interest were , , , , , CoNS, and complex.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight ecological studies and one individual-level study were included. Ecological studies were predominantly retrospective in design (19 studies) and of reasonable (20 studies) to high (8 studies) methodological quality. Of the eight pathogens of interest, no relevant data were identified for . and CoNS. Across all pathogens, the time-lag data from the 28 ecological studies showed a similar pattern, with the majority of studies reporting lags ranging from 0 to 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS
Development of antibiotic resistance for the investigated antibiotic/pathogen combinations tends to occur over 0 to 6 months following exposure within European hospitals. This information could inform planning of antibiotic stewardship activities in hospital settings.
PubMed: 36694849
DOI: 10.1093/jacamr/dlad001 -
Microorganisms Dec 2022: Gram-negative bacteria are causative agents of endogenous endophthalmitis (EBE). We aim to systematically review the current literature to assess the aetiologies, risk... (Review)
Review
: Gram-negative bacteria are causative agents of endogenous endophthalmitis (EBE). We aim to systematically review the current literature to assess the aetiologies, risk factors, and early ocular lesions in cases of Gram-negative EBE. : All peer-reviewed articles between January 2002 and August 2022 regarding Gram-negative EBE were included. We conducted a literature search on PubMed and Cochrane Controlled Trials. : A total of 115 studies and 591 patients were included, prevalently Asian (98; 81.7%) and male (302; 62.9%). The most common comorbidity was diabetes (231; 55%). The main aetiologies were (510; 66.1%), (111; 14.4%), and (60; 7.8%). Liver abscesses (266; 54.5%) were the predominant source of infection. The most frequent ocular lesions were vitreal opacity (134; 49.6%) and hypopyon (95; 35.2%). Ceftriaxone (76; 30.9%), fluoroquinolones (14; 14.4%), and ceftazidime (213; 78.0%) were the most widely used as systemic, topical, and intravitreal anti-Gram-negative agents, respectively. The most reported surgical approaches were vitrectomy (130; 24.1%) and evisceration/exenteration (60; 11.1%). Frequently, visual acuity at discharge was no light perception (301; 55.2%). : Gram-negative EBEs are associated with poor outcomes. Our systematic review is mainly based on case reports and case series with significant heterogeneity. The main strength is the large sample spanning over 20 years. Our findings underscore the importance of considering ocular involvement in Gram-negative infections.
PubMed: 36677371
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms11010080 -
Journal of Infection and Public Health Mar 2023There is paucity of data describing the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on antimicrobial resistance. This review evaluated the changes in the rate of multidrug resistant... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There is paucity of data describing the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on antimicrobial resistance. This review evaluated the changes in the rate of multidrug resistant gram negative and gram positive bacteria during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS
A search was conducted in PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases to identify eligible studies. Studies that reported the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase inhibitor (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae, vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CPE) were selected. Studies published in English language from the start of COVID-19 pandemic to July 2022 were considered for inclusion.
RESULTS
Thirty eligible studies were selected and most of them were from Italy (n = 8), Turkey (n = 3) and Brazil (n = 3). The results indicated changes in the rate of multidrug resistant bacteria, and the changes varied between the studies. Most studies (54.5%) reported increase in MRSA infection/colonization during the pandemic, and the increase ranged from 4.6 to 170.6%. Five studies (55.6%) reported a 6.8-65.1% increase in VRE infection/colonization during the pandemic. A 2.4-58.2% decrease in ESBL E. coli and a 1.8-13.3% reduction in ESBL Klebsiella pneumoniae was observed during the pandemic. For CRAB, most studies (58.3%) reported 1.5-621.6% increase in infection/colonization during the pandemic. Overall, studies showed increase in the rate of CRE infection/colonization during the pandemic. There was a reduction in carbapenem-resistant E. coli during COVID-19 pandemic, and an increase in carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae. Most studies (55.6%) showed 10.4 - 40.9% reduction in the rate of CRPA infection during the pandemic.
CONCLUSION
There is an increase in the rate of multidrug resistant gram positive and gram negative bacteria during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rate of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae and CRPA has decrease during the pandemic. Both infection prevention and control strategies and antimicrobial stewardship should be strengthen to address the increasing rate of multidrug resistant gram positive and gram negative bacteria.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Pandemics; Gram-Negative Bacteria; Escherichia coli; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Gram-Positive Bacteria; COVID-19; Enterobacteriaceae; Klebsiella pneumoniae; Carbapenems; Microbial Sensitivity Tests
PubMed: 36657243
DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2022.12.022 -
European Journal of Microbiology &... Jan 2023This review aimed to evaluate the contamination rate of dental unit waterlines (DUWL) with Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Legionella pneumophila in several countries in the... (Review)
Review
This review aimed to evaluate the contamination rate of dental unit waterlines (DUWL) with Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Legionella pneumophila in several countries in the Middle East.Literature search was conducted in databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to gather studies published from the beginning of 2000 to 30th April 2020. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were; "Legionellosis"; "Legionnaire", "Legionellosis", "L. pneumophila", "dent", "dental", "dentistry", "Dental Unit Waterlines", "dental water", "DUWL", "Middle East", "P. aeruginosa", "Iran", "Turkey", "Iraq", and "Jordan". The search was independently conducted by two of the authors. Data was analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.Almost all studies included in this review reported a high rate of bacterial contamination of DUWL, which exceeded the current standard bacterial contamination level of <200 (CFU) mL-1 recommended by the American Dental Association (ADA). The combined prevalence of L. pneumophila from four countries (Iran, Jordan, Turkey, and Iraq) was 23.5% (95% Cl: 6.5-57.7), and the combined prevalence of P. aeruginosa was reported 21.7% (95% Cl: 7.1-50.1%).This study showed a high bacterial contamination rate of DUWL with opportunistic pathogens. So, it is recommended to prevent biofilm formation in DUWL, some measures should be extended by practical approaches allowing for water quality control and improvement on-site in the dental practices such as mobile filtration units, chlorination and disinfection chemicals.
PubMed: 36626121
DOI: 10.1556/1886.2022.00023 -
Osong Public Health and Research... Dec 2022This study aimed to describe the presence and geographical distribution of Gram-negativebacteria considered critical on the priority list of antibiotic-resistant...
This study aimed to describe the presence and geographical distribution of Gram-negativebacteria considered critical on the priority list of antibiotic-resistant pathogens publishedby the World Health Organization, including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae,carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter spp., and carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.A systematic review of original studies published in 5 databases between 2010 and 2021 wasconducted, including genotypically confirmed carbapenem-resistant isolates obtained fromcanines, felines, and their settings. Fifty-one articles met the search criteria. Carbapenemresistant isolates were found in domestic canines and felines, pet food, and on veterinarymedical and household surfaces. The review found that the so-called "big five"-that is, the5 major carbapenemases identified worldwide in Enterobacterales (New Delhi metallo-βlactamase, active-on-imipenem, Verona integron-encoded metallo-β-lactamase, Klebsiellapneumoniae carbapenemase, and oxacillin [OXA]-48-like)-and the 3 most importantcarbapenemases from Acinetobacter spp. (OXA-23-like, OXA-40-like, and OXA-58-like) hadbeen detected in 8 species in the Enterobacteriaceae family and 5 species of glucose nonfermenting bacilli on 5 continents. Two publications used molecular analysis to confirmcarbapenem-resistant bacteria transmission between owners and dogs. Isolating criticallyimportant human carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria from domestic canines andfelines highlights the importance of including these animal species in surveillance programsand antimicrobial resistance containment plans as part of the One Health approach.
PubMed: 36617547
DOI: 10.24171/j.phrp.2022.0033 -
International Journal of Environmental... Dec 2022Mouthwashes are used as oral care for critical care patients to prevent infections. However, there are conflicting data concerning whether mouthwashes are needed as a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Mouthwashes are used as oral care for critical care patients to prevent infections. However, there are conflicting data concerning whether mouthwashes are needed as a part of daily oral care for critical care patients. This study aimed to evaluate the anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial effects of mouthwashes for critical care patients. The PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and grey literature databases were searched by descriptors combining population (intensive care unit patients) and intervention (mouthwashes). After the screening, only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial effects of mouthwashes in patient critical care were included. From the 1531 articles, 16 RCTs satisfied the eligibility criteria for systematic review and 10 were included in the meta-analyses. A significant difference was found in the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) (odds ratio [OR] 0.53, 95% confidential interval [95% CI] 0.33 to 0.86) between the mouthwash and placebo groups, while no significant difference was found in the mortality (OR 1.49, 95%CI 0.92 to 2.40); the duration of mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.10, 95%CI -2.01 to 1.81); and the colonization of (OR 0.88, 95%CI 0.34 to 2.30), (OR 1.19, 95%CI 0.50 to 2.82), and (OR 1.16, 95%CI 0.27 to 4.91) between the two groups. In conclusion, mouthwashes were effective in decreasing the incidence of VAP. Thus, mouthwashes can be used as part of daily oral care for critical care patients.
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; Respiration, Artificial; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Intensive Care Units; Anti-Inflammatory Agents
PubMed: 36613055
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010733 -
The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine Dec 2022: Antibiotic resistance in cystic fibrosis (CF) is a well-known phenomenon. However, the comprehensive epidemiological impact of antibiotic resistance in CF is not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
: Antibiotic resistance in cystic fibrosis (CF) is a well-known phenomenon. However, the comprehensive epidemiological impact of antibiotic resistance in CF is not clearly documented. So, this meta-analysis evaluated the proportion rates of carbapenem resistance (imipenem, meropenem, and doripenem) in CF based on publication date (1979-2000, 2001-2010, and 2011-2021), continents, pathogens, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). : We searched studies in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (until April 2021). Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software (version 14.0). : The 110 studies included in the analysis were performed in 25 countries and investigated 13,324 pathogens associated with CF. The overall proportion of imipenem, meropenem, and doripenem resistance in CF were 43% (95% CI 36-49), 48% (95% CI 40-57), 28% (95% CI 23-33), and 45% (95% CI 32-59), respectively. Our meta-analysis showed that trends of imipenem, meropenem, and doripenem-resistance had gradual decreases over time (1979-2021). This could be due to the limited clinical effectiveness of these antibiotics to treat CF cases over time. Among the opportunistic pathogens associated with CF, the highest carbapenem resistance rates were shown in , spp., , and . The highest and lowest carbapenem resistance rates among in CF patients were shown against meropenem (23%) and doripenem (39%). : We showed that trends of carbapenem resistance had decreased over time (1979-2021). This could be due to the limited clinical effectiveness of these antibiotics to treat CF cases over time. Plans should be directed to fight biofilm-associated infections and prevent the emergence of mutational resistance. Systematic surveillance for carbapenemase-producing pathogens in CF by molecular surveillance is necessitated.
Topics: Humans; Meropenem; Doripenem; Carbapenems; Cystic Fibrosis; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Imipenem; Pseudomonas aeruginosa
PubMed: 36568834
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Apr 2023The aim of the guidelines is to provide recommendations on perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in adult inpatients who are carriers of multidrug-resistant...
SCOPE
The aim of the guidelines is to provide recommendations on perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in adult inpatients who are carriers of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) before surgery.
METHODS
These evidence-based guidelines were developed after a systematic review of published studies on PAP targeting the following MDR-GNB: extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), aminoglycoside-resistant Enterobacterales, fluoroquinolone-resistant Enterobacterales, cotrimoxazole-resistant Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), extremely drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, colistin-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, and pan-drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. The critical outcomes were the occurrence of surgical site infections (SSIs) caused by any bacteria and/or by the colonizing MDR-GNB, and SSI-attributable mortality. Important outcomes included the occurrence of any type of postsurgical infectious complication, all-cause mortality, and adverse events of PAP, including development of resistance to targeted (culture-based) PAP after surgery and incidence of Clostridioides difficile infections. The last search of all databases was performed until April 30, 2022. The level of evidence and strength of each recommendation were defined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel was reached for the final list of recommendations. Antimicrobial stewardship considerations were included in the recommendation development.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The guideline panel reviewed the evidence, per bacteria, of the risk of SSIs in patients colonized with MDR-GNB before surgery and critically appraised the existing studies. Significant knowledge gaps were identified, and most questions were addressed by observational studies. Moderate to high risk of bias was identified in the retrieved studies, and the majority of the recommendations were supported by low level of evidence. The panel conditionally recommends rectal screening and targeted PAP for fluoroquinolone-resistant Enterobacterales before transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and for extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales in patients undergoing colorectal surgery and solid organ transplantation. Screening for CRE and CRAB is suggested before transplant surgery after assessment of the local epidemiology. Careful consideration of the laboratory workload and involvement of antimicrobial stewardship teams before implementing the screening procedures or performing changes in PAP are warranted. High-quality prospective studies to assess the impact of PAP among CRE and CRAB carriers performing high-risk surgeries are advocated. Future well-designed clinical trials should assess the effectiveness of targeted PAP, including the monitoring of MDR-GNB colonization through postoperative cultures using European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing clinical breakpoints.
Topics: Male; Adult; Humans; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Prospective Studies; Gram-Negative Bacteria; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Carbapenems; Cephalosporins; Monobactams; Fluoroquinolones
PubMed: 36566836
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.12.012 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2022This systematic review describes the role of the human microbiome and microbiota in healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Studies on the microbiota of patients,...
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review describes the role of the human microbiome and microbiota in healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Studies on the microbiota of patients, healthcare environment (HE), medical equipment, or healthcare workers (HCW) and how it could be transmitted among the different subjects will be described in order to define alarming risk factors for HAIs spreading and to identify strategies for HAIs control or prevention.
METHODS
This review was performed in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. After retrieval in databases, identification, and screening of available records, 36 published studies were considered eligible and included in the review.
RESULTS
A multifaceted approach is required and the analyses of the many factors related to human microbiota, which can influence HAIs onset, could be of paramount importance in their prevention and control. In this review, we will focus mainly on the localization, transmission, and prevention of ESKAPE (, and ) bacteria and Clostridium difficile which are the most common pathogens causing HAIs.
CONCLUSIONS
Healthcare workers' microbiota, patient's microbiota, environmental and medical equipment microbiota, ecosystem characteristics, ways of transmission, cleaning strategies, and the microbial resistome should be taken into account for future studies on more effective preventive and therapeutic strategies against HAIs.
Topics: Humans; Cross Infection; Microbiota; Delivery of Health Care
PubMed: 36530685
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.989496 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2022Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers. Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged not only as an important infection in people who are hospitalised, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer on people with cystic fibrosis a worse clinical outcome and result in an increased rate of lung function decline. Clear guidance for MRSA eradication in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence, is urgently needed. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis. To ascertain whether attempts at eradicating MRSA can lead to increased acquisition of other resistant organisms (including Pseudomonas aeruginosa), increased adverse effects from drugs, or both.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders (CFGD) Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, PubMed, MEDLINE and three clinical trials registries; by handsearching article reference lists; and through contact with experts in the field. We last searched the CFGD Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register on 4 October 2021, and the ongoing trials registries on 31 January 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials primarily aimed at eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and used the GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The review includes three RCTs with 135 participants with MRSA infection. Two trials compared active treatment versus observation only and one trial compared active treatment with placebo. Active treatment versus observation In both trials (106 participants), active treatment consisted of oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin. One trial administered this combination for two weeks alongside nasal, skin and oral decontamination and a three-week environmental decontamination, while the second trial administered this drug combination for 21 days with five days intranasal mupirocin. Both trials reported successful eradication of MRSA in people with cystic fibrosis, but they used different definitions of eradication. One trial (45 participants) defined MRSA eradication as negative MRSA respiratory cultures at day 28, and reported that oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin may lead to a higher proportion of negative cultures compared to control (odds ratio (OR) 12.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.84 to 55.84; low-certainty evidence). However, by day 168 of follow-up, there was no difference between groups in the proportion of participants who remained MRSA-negative (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.31 to 4.42; low-certainty evidence). The second trial defined successful eradication as the absence of MRSA following treatment in at least three cultures over a period of six months. We are uncertain if the intervention led to results favouring the treatment group as the certainty of the evidence was very low (OR 2.74, 95% CI 0.64 to 11.75). There were no differences between groups in the remaining outcomes for this comparison: quality of life, frequency of exacerbations or adverse effects (all low-certainty evidence) or the change from baseline in lung function or weight (both very low-certainty evidence). The time until next positive MRSA isolate was not reported. The included trials found no differences between groups in terms of nasal colonisation with MRSA. While not a specific outcome of this review, investigators from one study reported that the rate of hospitalisation from screening through day 168 was lower with oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin compared to control (rate ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.72; P = 0.01). Nebulised vancomycin with oral antibiotics versus nebulised placebo with oral antibiotics The third trial (29 participants) defined eradication as a negative respiratory sample for MRSA at one month following completion of treatment. No differences were reported in MRSA eradication between treatment arms (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.39; low-certainty evidence). No differences between groups were seen in lung function or adverse effects (low-certainty evidence), in quality of life (very low-certainty evidence) or nasal colonisation with MRSA. The trial did not report on the change in weight or frequency of exacerbations. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Early eradication of MRSA is possible in people with cystic fibrosis, with one trial demonstrating superiority of active MRSA treatment compared with observation only in terms of the proportion of MRSA-negative respiratory cultures at day 28. However, follow-up at three or six months showed no difference between treatment and control in the proportion of participants remaining MRSA-negative. Moreover, the longer-term clinical consequences - in terms of lung function, mortality and cost of care - remain unclear. Using GRADE methodology, we judged the certainty of the evidence provided by this review to be very low to low, due to potential biases from the open-label design, high rates of attrition and small sample sizes. Based on the available evidence, we believe that whilst early eradication of respiratory MRSA in people with cystic fibrosis is possible, there is not currently enough evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of eradication to support the use of the interventions studied.
Topics: Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Cystic Fibrosis; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Rifampin
PubMed: 36511181
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009650.pub5