22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Antimicrobial resistance profile of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates in children reported from the ISPED surveillance of bacterial resistance, 2016–2021

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) poses a serious threat to public health worldwide. In December 2015, the Infectious Disease Surveillance of Pediatrics (ISPED) program was organized to monitor bacterial epidemiology and resistance trends in children.

          Methods

          This retrospective study was conducted from January 2016–December 2021 on patients at eleven ISPED-group hospitals.

          Results

          From 2016–2021, a total of 13024 MRSA isolates were obtained from children. The most common age group for patients with MRSA infection was less than 3 years old, and newborns were an important group affected by MRSA infection. MRSA was most commonly isolated from the lower respiratory, an abscess, a secretion, or blood in neonates and from the lower respiratory, an abscess, or the upper respiratory in non-neonates. All isolates were susceptible to vancomycin and linezolid and resistant to penicillin; additionally, 76.88%, 54.97%, 22.30%, 5.67%, 5.14%, 3.63%, and 1.42% were resistant to erythromycin, clindamycin, tetracycline, levofloxacin, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (TMP-SMX), gentamicin, and rifampin, respectively. Between 2016 and 2021, a significant increase was seen in the levofloxacin- and TMP-SMX-resistance rates (from 5.45% to 7.14% and from 4.67% to 6.50%, respectively) among MRSA isolates, along with a significant decrease in the rates of resistance to erythromycin (from 82.61% to 68.08%), clindamycin (from 60.95% to 46.82%), tetracycline (from 25.37% to 17.13%), gentamicin (from 4.53% to 2.82%), and rifampin (from 1.89% to 0.41%).

          Discussion

          The antibiotic-resistance rates varied among MRSA isolated from different sources. Because of the high antibiotic resistance rate to clindamycin, this antibiotic is not recommended for empirical treatment of MRSA infections, especially in osteomyelitis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children: executive summary.

          Evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections were prepared by an Expert Panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). The guidelines are intended for use by health care providers who care for adult and pediatric patients with MRSA infections. The guidelines discuss the management of a variety of clinical syndromes associated with MRSA disease, including skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI), bacteremia and endocarditis, pneumonia, bone and joint infections, and central nervous system (CNS) infections. Recommendations are provided regarding vancomycin dosing and monitoring, management of infections due to MRSA strains with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin, and vancomycin treatment failures.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Resistance trends among clinical isolates in China reported from CHINET surveillance of bacterial resistance, 2005-2014.

            With the aim of gathering temporal trends on bacterial epidemiology and resistance from multiple laboratories in China, the CHINET surveillance system was organized in 2005. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was carried out according to a unified protocol using the Kirby-Bauer method or automated systems. Results were analyzed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) 2014 definitions. Between 2005 and 2014, the number of bacterial isolates ranged between 22,774 and 84,572 annually. Rates of extended-spectrum β-lactamase production among Escherichia coli isolates were stable, between 51.7 and 55.8%. Resistance of E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae to amikacin, ciprofloxacin, piperacillin/tazobactam and cefoperazone/sulbactam decreased with time. Carbapenem resistance among K. pneumoniae isolates increased from 2.4 to 13.4%. Resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains against all of antimicrobial agents tested including imipenem and meropenem decreased with time. On the contrary, resistance of Acinetobacter baumannii strains to carbapenems increased from 31 to 66.7%. A marked decrease of methicillin resistance from 69% in 2005 to 44.6% in 2014 was observed for Staphylococcus aureus. Carbapenem resistance rates in K. pneumoniae and A. baumannii in China are high. Our results indicate the importance of bacterial surveillance studies.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Trends in Antibiotic Resistance Among Ocular Microorganisms in the United States From 2009 to 2018

              This cross-sectional study assesses the types of antibiotic resistance profiles and trends among bacterial isolates from ocular sources that were prevalent from 2009 to 2018. Question What are the antibiotic resistance profiles and trends among common ocular pathogens across the United States? Findings In this cross-sectional study of more than 6000 ocular isolates of Staphylococcus aureus , coagulase-negative staphylococci, Streptococcus pneumoniae , Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae collected between 2009 and 2018, methicillin resistance and multidrug resistance were prevalent among staphylococci. Antibiotic resistance profiles were mostly unchanged during 10 years. Meaning These in vitro antibiotic resistance data may assist clinicians in selecting appropriate antibiotics for treatment of ocular infections. Importance Antibiotic resistance in ocular infections can affect treatment outcomes. Surveillance data on evolving antibacterial susceptibility patterns inform the treatment of such infections. Objective To assess overall antibiotic resistance profiles and trends among bacterial isolates from ocular sources collected during 10 years. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study of longitudinal data from the ongoing, nationwide, prospective, laboratory-based surveillance study, the Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring in Ocular Microorganisms (ARMOR) study, included clinically relevant isolates of Staphylococcus aureus , coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), Streptococcus pneumoniae , Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae cultured from patients with ocular infections at US centers from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures Minimum inhibitory concentrations were determined for various combinations of antibiotics and species. Odds ratios (ORs) were determined for concurrent antibiotic resistance; analysis of variance and χ 2 tests were used to evaluate resistance rates by patient age and geographic region; Cochran-Armitage tests identified changing antibiotic susceptibility trends over time. Results A total of 6091 isolates (2189 S aureus , 1765 CoNS, 590 S pneumoniae , 767 P aeruginosa , and 780 H influenzae ) from 6091 patients were submitted by 88 sites. Overall, 765 S aureus (34.9%) and 871 CoNS (49.3%) isolates were methicillin resistant and more likely to be concurrently resistant to macrolides (azithromycin: S aureus : OR, 18.34 [95% CI, 13.64-24.67]; CoNS: OR, 4.59 [95% CI, 3.72-5.66]), fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin: S aureus : OR, 22.61 [95% CI, 17.96-28.47]; CoNS: OR, 9.73 [95% CI, 7.63-12.40]), and aminoglycosides (tobramycin: S aureus : OR, 18.29 [95% CI, 13.21-25.32]; CoNS: OR, 6.28 [95% CI, 4.61-8.56]) compared with methicillin-susceptible isolates ( P  < .001 for all). Multidrug resistance was observed among methicillin-resistant S aureus (577 [75.4%]) and CoNS (642 [73.7%]) isolates. Antibiotic resistance among S pneumoniae isolates was highest for azithromycin (214 [36.3%]), whereas P aeruginosa and H influenzae isolates showed low resistance overall. Differences in antibiotic resistance were found among isolates by patient age ( S aureus : F  = 28.07, P  < .001; CoNS: F  = 11.46, P  < .001) and geographic region ( S aureus : F  = 8.03, P  < .001; CoNS: F  = 4.79, P  = .003; S pneumoniae : F  = 8.14, P  < .001; P aeruginosa : F  = 4.32, P  = .005). Small changes in antibiotic resistance were noted over time (≤2.5% per year), with decreases in resistance to oxacillin/methicillin (oxacillin: −2.16%; 95% CI, −3.91% to −0.41%; P  < .001) and other antibiotics among S aureus isolates, a decrease in ciprofloxacin resistance among CoNS (−1.38%; 95% CI, −2.24% to −0.52%; P  < .001), and an increase in tobramycin resistance among CoNS (0.71%; 95% CI, –0.29% to 1.71%; P  = .03). Besifloxacin retained consistently low minimum inhibitory concentrations. Conclusions and Relevance Antibiotic resistance may be prevalent among staphylococcal isolates, particularly among older patients. In this study, a few small differences in antibiotic resistance were observed by geographic region or longitudinally.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Cell Infect Microbiol
                Front Cell Infect Microbiol
                Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.
                Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2235-2988
                19 January 2023
                2023
                : 13
                : 1102779
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Department of Infectious Diseases, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University , Shanghai, China
                [2] 2 Department of Clinical Laboratory, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University , Shanghai, China
                [3] 3 Department of Infectious Diseases, Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University , Chongqing, China
                [4] 4 Department of Clinical Laboratory, Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University , Chongqing, China
                [5] 5 Department of Infectious Diseases, Children’s Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine , Hangzhou, China
                [6] 6 Department of Infectious Diseases, Qilu Children’s Hospital of Shandong University , Jinan, China
                [7] 7 Department of Infectious Diseases, Shenzhen Children’s Hospital , Shenzhen, China
                [8] 8 Department of Infectious Diseases, Shanghai Children’s Medical Center of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine , Shanghai, China
                [9] 9 Department of Infectious Diseases, Xi’an Children’s Hospital , Xi’an, China
                [10] 10 Department of Clinical Laboratory, Xi’an Children’s Hospital , Xi’an, China
                [11] 11 Department of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Second Affiliated Hospital & Yuying Children’s Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University , Wenzhou, China
                [12] 12 Department of Clinical Laboratory, Second Affiliated Hospital & Yuying Children’s Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University , Wenzhou, China
                [13] 13 Department of Gastroenterology and Infectious Diseases, Children’s Hospital of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine , Shanghai, China
                [14] 14 Department of Pediatrics, Bethune First Hospital of Jilin University , Changchun, China
                [15] 15 Department of Infectious Diseases, Kaifeng Children’s Hospital , Kaifeng, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Fann Wu, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, United States

                Reviewed by: Nazan Tuna, Namik Kemal University, Türkiye; Xiaotian Zheng, Akron Children’s Hospital, United States

                *Correspondence: Hui Yu, yuhui4756@ 123456sina.com

                This article was submitted to Clinical Microbiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology

                Article
                10.3389/fcimb.2023.1102779
                9892648
                36743309
                c1e988a4-e6ca-4e00-9d3b-0458aa0cf638
                Copyright © 2023 Wu, Wang, He, Xu, Jing, Chen, Lin, Deng, Cao, Deng, Cai, Chen, Yang, Zhang, Huang, Hao and Yu

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 19 November 2022
                : 04 January 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 38, Pages: 8, Words: 3755
                Funding
                This research was funded by the Key Development Program of Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, grant number EK2022ZX05.
                Categories
                Cellular and Infection Microbiology
                Original Research

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus ,antimicrobial resistance,children,infectious disease surveillance of pediatrics (isped),neonates

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log