期刊文献+

2018-2020年医院临床分离菌分布特征及耐药情况分析

Analysis of distribution characteristics and drug resistance of clinical isolates in the hospital from 2018 to 2020
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的了解医院2018-2020年临床分离菌的分布情况及对常用抗菌药物的耐药情况,为临床合理使用抗菌药物提供依据。方法收集该院2018年1月至2020年12月临床分离细菌,采用VITEK2-Compact全自动细菌鉴定药敏仪或纸片扩散法进行抗菌药物的灵敏度试验,按照2020年美国临床和实验室标准化协会推荐的药敏试验方法进行结果判定。数据统计分析采用WHONET 5.6软件。结果2018年至2020年共分离细菌株,其中革兰阳性菌646株(28.8%),革兰阴性菌1595株(71.2%)。耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌检出率为56.4%,粪肠球菌对多数抗菌药物的耐药性低于屎肠球菌,未发现对万古霉素的耐药的粪肠球菌,但是发现2株耐万古霉素的屎肠球菌。这3年,耐碳青霉烯铜绿假单胞菌、耐碳青霉烯大肠埃希菌耐药菌的检出率呈稳定趋势,耐碳青霉烯肺炎克雷伯菌检出率呈逐年上升趋势,耐碳青霉烯鲍曼不动杆菌的检出率呈现逐年下降趋势。结论医院耐碳青霉烯肺炎克雷伯菌检出率较高,细菌耐药性形势已较为严峻,应加强抗菌药物的合理使用和感控措施,同时应做好细菌耐药监测工作。 Objective To investigate the distribution and drug resistance of clinical isolates in the hospital from 2018 to 2020.Methods The clinical isolates were collected from Jan 2018 to Dec 2020.The VITEK 2-compact automatic bacterial detection system or disc diffusion method was used for drug susceptibility test.The drug susceptibility results were judged based on the 2020 version of the US Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute standard and the data were analyzed using the WHONET 5.6 software.Results A total of pathogens were isolated during 2018 to 2020,including646(28.8%)Gram-positive bacteria and 1595(71.2%)Gram-negative bacteria.The detection rate of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was 56.4%.Enterococcus faecium is more resistant to most antibacterial drugs than Enterococcus faecalis.No Enterococcus faecalis resistant to vancomycin was found.But two strain of Enterococcus faecium was found to be resistant to vancomycin.During the past three years,the resistance rate of CRPA and CRECO showed a stable trend,the resistance rate of CRKPN increased year by year,the resistance rate of CRABA is on a downward trend.Conclusion The resistance rate of Klebsiellapneumoniae to carbapenems increased year by year,the situation of bacterial resistance in this hospital has become severe,the rational use of antimicrobials and infection control measures should be strengthened and the monitoring of bacterial resistance should be done well.
作者 王辛 左依依 郑永刚 WANG Xin;ZUO Yiyi;ZHENG Yonggang(Department of Clinical Laboratory,the Tsinghua University Yuquan Hospital(Tsinghua University Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine),Beijing 100040,China)
出处 《检验医学与临床》 CAS 2022年第S02期45-49,共5页 Laboratory Medicine and Clinic
关键词 病原菌 抗菌药物 细菌耐药监测 pathogenic bacteria antibacterials bacterial resistance monitoring
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

  • 1王辉,俞云松,王明贵,倪语星,马越,任健康,韩锟,卓超,徐英春,胡云建,胡志东,曹彬,罗燕萍,褚云卓,廖康,康梅,张冀霞.替加环素体外药敏试验操作规程专家共识[J].中华检验医学杂志,2013,36(7):584-587. 被引量:133
  • 2王辉.对《替加环素体外药敏试验操作规程专家共识》一文的更正[J].中华检验医学杂志,2015,38(8):569-569. 被引量:9
  • 3胡付品,郭燕,朱德妹,汪复,蒋晓飞,徐英春,张小江,张朝霞,季萍,谢轶,康梅,王传清,王爱敏,徐元宏,黄颖,孙自镛,陈中举,倪语星,孙景勇,褚云卓,田素飞,胡志东,李金,俞云松,林洁,单斌,杜艳,郭素芳,魏莲花,邹凤梅,张泓,王春,胡云建,艾效曼,卓超,苏丹虹,郭大文,赵金英,喻华,黄湘宁,刘文恩,李艳明,金炎,邵春红,徐雪松,鄢超,王山梅,楚亚菲,张利侠,马娟,周树平,周艳,朱镭,孟晋华,董芳,郑红艳,胡芳芳,沈瀚,周万青,贾伟,李刚,吴劲松,卢月梅,李继红,段金菊,康建邦,马晓波,郑燕萍,郭如意,朱焱,陈运生,孟青,王世富,胡雪飞,沈继录,汪瑞忠,房华,俞碧霞,赵勇,龚萍,温开镇,张贻荣,刘江山,廖龙凤,顾洪芹,姜琳,贺雯,薛顺虹,冯佼,窦睿,岳春雷.2020年CHINET中国细菌耐药监测[J].中国感染与化疗杂志,2021,21(4):377-387. 被引量:328

二级参考文献18

  • 1Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty-first informational supplement. MI00-S22. Wayne, PA:CLSI,2012.
  • 2European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version I. I, 2010-04-27.
  • 3Jones RN, Ferraro MJ, Reller LB, et al. Multicenter studies of tigecycline disk diffusion susceptibility results for Acinetobacter spp.J Clin Microbiol,2007 ,45 :227-230.
  • 4Fernrindez-Mazarrasa C, Mazarrasa 0, CalvoJ, et al. High concerntration of mananese in Mueller-Hinton agar increase MICs of tigecyc:line determined by Etest.J Clin Microbiol, 2009, 47: 827-829.
  • 5Bradford PA, Petersen PJ, Young M, et al. Tigecycline MIC testing by broth dilution requires use of fresh medium or addition of the biocatalytic oxygen-reducing reagent oxyrase to standardize the test method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother ,2005,49 :3903-3909.
  • 6Curcio D, Fernandez F. Comment on: Effect of different Mueller?Hinton agars on tigecycline disc diffusion susceptibility for Acinetobacter spp.J Antimicrob Chemother ,2008,62: 1166-1167.
  • 7Casal M, Rodriguez F,Johnson B, et al. Influence of testing methodology on the tigecycline activity profile against presumably tigecycline-nan-susceptible Acinetobacter spp.J Antimicrob Chemather, 2009, 64:69-72.
  • 8Zarkotou 0, Pournaras S, Altouvas G, et al. Comparative evaluation of tigecycline susceptibility testing methods far expanded-spectrum cephalosporin and carbapenem-resistant gram?negative pathogens.J Clin Microbiol, 2012, 50 :3747-3750.
  • 9LiuJW, Ko WC, Huang CH, et al. Agreement assessment of tigecycline susceptibilities determined by the disk diffusion and broth microdilution methods among commonly encountered resistant bacterial isolates: results from the Tigecycline In Vitro Surveillance in Taiwan (TIST) study, 2008 to 2010. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2012, 56:1414-1417.
  • 10Huang TD, Berhin C, Bogaerts P, et al. In vitro susceptibility of multi drug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae clinical isolates to tigecycline.J Antimicrob Chemother, 2012, 67 :2696-2699.

共引文献460

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部