Aerobic bacterial infections in a burns unit of Sassoon
Transcription
Aerobic bacterial infections in a burns unit of Sassoon
International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 Original article Aerobic bacterial infections in a burns unit of Sassoon General Hospital, Pune Patil P, Joshi S, Bharadwaj R. Department of Microbiology, B.J. Medical College, Pune, India. Corresponding author: Dr. Priyanka Patil Abstract: Introduction: Infection in the burn patient is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality and remains one of the most challenging concerns for the burn team. For this reason we carried out a study to determine the predominant bacteria causing infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern. Methods: A prospective cross sectional study over a period of three months was carried out in burns unit of Sassoon General Hospital, Pune. A total of 51 surface wound swab specimens from 39 patients were collected and processed aerobically. All isolates were identified by conventional microbiological methods and their antibiogram was determined as per CLSI guidelines. Results: 81 isolates were obtained from 51 specimens. Out of them, 26 (50.98%) specimens were mono-microbial while 25 (49.01%) specimens were poly-microbial. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common isolate 22 (27.61%) followed by Klebsiella species 13, 16.04%), Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (12, 14.81%). Both gram positive and gram negative isolates show widespread resistance to first-line antibiotics. While they are relatively sensitive to second line agents which are considered as reserved drugs. Conclusion: Our results were helpful in providing guidelines regarding empirical antimicrobial treatment in burns patients before the results of microbiological culture became available. Key words: burn wound, Antimicrobial resistance, Pseudomonas aeruginosa Introduction surveillance is needed. So the current study was Burn injury is one of the most common and undertaken to assess predominant aerobic microbial devastating forms of trauma in many areas of the flora and their antibiogram in burns unit of Sassoon world. It has been estimated that 75% of all deaths General Hospital, Pune. following Aims & Objectives infections. thermal (1) injuries are related to The rate of nosocomial infections is To determine the predominant bacteria and their higher in burn patients due to various factors like antimicrobial susceptibility pattern nature of burn injury itself, immunocompromised infections in burn wound patients. status of the patient, invasive diagnostic and Material & Methods causing (2) The present study was conducted in the Department Good infection control practices have a great of Microbiology, Sassoon General Hospital, Pune. impact on survival rate of burn patients. Emerging This was a prospective cross sectional study. antimicrobial resistance in burn wound bacterial Among the admitted patients, thirty nine randomly pathogens represent a serious therapeutic challenge selected patients who gave consent were included for clinicians treating these patients. In order to the study. A total of 51 surface burn wound swabs overcome this problem continuous microbiological were collected from 39 patients (13 males & 26 therapeutic procedures and prolonged ICU stay. 106 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072 International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 females) over a period of three months from June- conventional microbiological methods. August 2010. Extent of burn injury ranged from Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern was determined (15%-70%). These Patients were not having as per Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute infected wound at the time of admission. Burn (CLSI) guidelines. wound infection was evident after one week stay in To assess the differences in the range of bacterial the hospital. All specimens were transported in pathogens in male & female wards, they were sterile, leak-proof container to Department of studied &analyzed separately. Re-sampling was Microbiology. They were processed for aerobic done in 6 patients who were not responding to bacterial pathogens &isolates were identified by treatment. Fig. 1: Schematic Representation of Burns Unit of Sassoon General Hospital, Pune. Observation & results Out of 51 specimens, single organism was isolated in 25(49%) specimens while mixed organisms were isolated in 26(51%). Total 81 isolates were obtained. Table 1: Distribution of aerobic bacterial isolates (n=81) ISOLATES NO Percentage (%) Pseudomonas aeruginosa 22 27 Klebsiella pneumonae 13 16 MRSA 12 15 Citrobacter spp. 11 13 Escherichia coli 10 12 Proteus mirabilis 5 6 Enterobacter spp. 3 4 Acinetobacter spp. 3 4 2 3 81 100 Coagulase negative staphylococci TOTAL 107 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072 International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 the In this study, we have compared antibiogram of Klebsiella pathogens obtained from male and female wards. pneumonae 13(16%) and MRSA 12(15%). (Table The antibiogram of Gram negative organisms 1) isolated from burn wound is shown in Table 2. Pseudomonas commonest 22(27%) aeruginosa isolate followed was by Table 2: Antimicrobial Sensitivity Pattern of Gram negative isolates in male & female wards Escherichia coli Citrobacter spp. (n=11) (n=10) Female Male Female Male Female ward ward ward ward ward ward isolates isolates isolates isolate isolates isolate n=4 n=6 n=6 n=5 n=8 n=5 Sensitivity CRO SXT G CIP T IPM PTZ (n=13) Male AMA AK Klebsiella pneumonae NO % NO % NO % NO % NO % NO % S 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 20 0 0 0 0 R 4 100 6 100 6 100 4 80 8 100 5 100 S 0 0 1 16.6 1 16.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 R 4 100 5 83.4 5 83.4 5 100 8 100 5 100 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R 4 100 6 100 6 100 5 100 8 100 5 100 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R 4 100 6 100 6 100 5 100 8 100 5 100 S 1 25 1 16.6 3 50 2 40 2 25 1 20 R 3 75 5 83.4 3 50 3 60 6 75 4 80 S 1 25 2 33.3 2 33.3 1 20 1 12.5 2 40 R 3 75 5 66.7 5 66.7 4 80 7 87.5 3 60 S 4 100 6 100 6 100 0 0 6 75 4 80 R 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 100 2 25 1 20 S 4 100 6 100 0 100 4 80 7 87.5 4 80 R 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 20 1 12.5 1 20 AMA = Antimicrobial agent, AK = Amikacin, Ceftriaxone, Cotrimoxazole, and Gentamicin. CRO = Ceftriaxone, SXT = Cotrimoxazole, G = E.coli and Citrobacter spp. were 100% sensitive to Gentamicin, CIP = Ciprofloxacin, T = Tetracycline, Imipenem and Piperacillin-Tazobactum. Sensitivity IPM = Imipenem, PTZ = Piperacillin-Tazobactum, pattern from both male and female wards doesn’t S = Susceptible, R = Resistant. show much difference. (Table 2) E.coli, Klebsiella spp. and Citrobacter spp. were highly resistance to first line drugs like Amikacin, Table 3: Antimicrobial Sensitivity Pattern of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in male & female wards 108 106 108 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072 International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n=22) AMA AK CAZ CB G CIP T IPM PTZ Sensitivity Male Female ward ward isolates isolates n=8 n=14 NO % NO % S 0 0 0 0 R 8 100 14 100 S 0 0 1 7.2 R 8 100 13 92.8 S 0 0 6 42.9 R 8 100 8 57.1 S 1 12.5 2 14.3 R 7 87.5 12 85.7 S 2 25 4 28.6 R 6 75 10 71.4 S 2 25 1 7.2 R 6 75 13 92.8 S 8 100 13 92.9 R 0 0 1 7.1 S 7 87.5 12 85.7 R 1 12.5 2 14.3 AMA = Antimicrobial agent, AK = Amikacin, This table shows Pseudomonas aeruginosa was CAZ = Ceftazidime, CB = Carbenicillin, G = highly sensitive to Imipenem (male ward 100%, Gentamicin, CIP = Ciprofloxacin, T = Tetracycline, female ward 93%) followed by Piperacillin- IPM = Imipenem, PTZ = Piperacillin-Tazobactum, Tazobactum (male ward 87.5%, female ward S = Susceptible, R = Resistant. 85.7%). Organisms were sensitive to Ciprofloxacin to some extent among first line drugs. (Table 3) Medworld asia Dedicated for quality research www.medworldasia.com 109 Table 4: Antimicrobial Sensitivity Pattern of MRSA in Male and Female wards 107 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072 International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 MRSA(n=12) Male AMA PEN SXT G E CIP CD VAN ward Female ward isolates isolates (n=6) (n=6) Sensitivity NO % NO % S 0 0 0 0 R 6 100 6 100 S 0 0 0 0 R 6 100 6 100 S 0 0 0 0 R 6 100 6 100 S 0 0 0 0 R 6 100 6 100 S 2 33.3 1 16.7 R 4 66.7 5 83.3 S 2 33.3 2 33.3 R 4 66.7 4 66.7 S 6 100 6 100 R 0 0 0 0 AMA = Antimicrobial agent, PEN = Penicillin, shown (Table 4). Staphylococcus aureus were SXT= Cotrimoxazole, G = Gentamicin, E = 100% Erythromycin, CIP Clindamycin, VAN = Ciprofloxacin, = Vancomycin, Sensitivity to penicillin, Cotrimoxazole, CD = Gentamicin, Erythromycin while they were 100% S = sensitive to Vancomycin followed by Clindamycin Susceptible, R = Resistant. Antimicrobial resistant (33.3%). Pattern of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from burn wound is Indian J of Basic & Applied Medical Research Now with IC Value 5.49 (Revised value for 2013) www.ijbamr.com 110 107 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072 International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 TABLE 5: Time Related Changes in organism isolated Patient No. M1 M2 1st sample 2nd sample P.aeruginosa MRSA, K.pneumoniae, E. coli P.aeruginosa K.pneumoniae, Pr.mirabilis, CONS P.aeruginosa, K.pneumoniae, M3 M4 Citrobacter spp K.pneumoniae, Pr.mirabilis, CONS MRSA, K.pneumoniae K.pneumoniae, Pr.mirabilis, CONS E.coli K.pneumoniae, Pr.mirabilis, CONS E.coli, P.aeruginosa E.coli , P.aeruginosa MRSA K.pneumoniae F1 F2 F3 (7, 8) When re-sampling was done in 6 patients who were other studies not responding to treatment we found the change in threat in our hospital. colonizing organisms. (Table 5) Fig. 1 shows the schematic representation of Discussion different burn wards in Sassoon General Hospital, Infection with multi-drug resistant organisms is an Pune. Here we have compared the isolates and important cause of mortality in burns. These sensitivity pattern from male and female wards. organisms have frequently been reported as the Since isolates from these wards were having almost cause of nosocomial outbreaks of infection in burn similar sensitivity they are most likely to be units or as colonizers of the wounds of burn hospital acquired. patients. (3, 4) , Acinetobacter was not a big E. coli, Klebsiella spp. and Citrobacter spp. were In the present study, P.aeruginosa (27%) was highly resistance to first line drugs like Amikacin, found to be predominant pathogen followed by Ceftriaxone, Cotrimoxazole, and Gentamicin while K.pneumoniae (16%) & MRSA (15%). This is they were 100% sensitive to Imipenem and consistent with other studies. (5, 6, 7, 8) In contrast to Piperacillin-Tazobactum. This is consistent with 111 107 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072 International J. of Healthcare and Biomedical Research, Volume: 03, Issue: 03, April 2015, Pages 106-112 (5, 6) other studies. surveillance should be the ongoing process to Staphylococcus aureus isolates were 100% resistant to Penicillin, Cotrimoxazole, determine change in colonizing bacteria. Gentamicin, and Erythromycin. These isolates were Based on the study we recommend the following: found to be 100% sensitive to Vancomycin. This is consistent with other study. • (5) Every institution having burns unit should periodically to determine predominant In this study, we have found that both gram flora causing burn wound colonization and positive show their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern. widespread resistance to first-line antibiotics. This would help in administration of While they are relatively sensitive to second line proper empirical antimicrobial treatment agents which are considered as reserved drugs. This before microbial culture reports become could be due to indiscriminate use of first line available. and antibiotics gram leading population of negative to isolates selective pressure bacteria.Re-sampling in • Due to high isolation rates of showed microorganisms and high antimicrobial changes in bacterial flora in patient’s burn wound. resistance it is crucial to improve infection This necessitates periodic sampling of the wound control practices like hand washing, sample over the hospital stay. barrier nursing, isolation of infected Conclusion persons, and culture & sensitivity for the This study would be helpful for the determination wound of the patients not responding to of antimicrobial policy of hospital. Microbiological empirical treatment. References: 1. 2. Vindenes H, Bjerknes R. Microbial colonization of large wounds Burns 1995; 21: 575-9. Pruitt Jr. BA, McManus AT, Kim SH, Goodwin CW. Burn Wound infections: current Status. World J Surg 1998; 22:13545. 3. Karlowsky JA, Jones ME, Draghi DC, Thornsberry C, Sahm DF, Volturo GA. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibilities of bacteria isolated from blood cultures of hospitalized patients in the United States in 2002. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2004; 3: 3-7. 4. Agnihotri N, Gupta V, Joshi RM. Aerobic bacterial isolates from burn wound infections and their antibiograms-a five year 5. Singh NP, Goyal R, Manchanda V, Das S, Kaur Z, Talwar V. Changing Trends in bacteriology of burns in the burns units, study. Burns 2004; 30: 241-3. Delhi, India. Burns 2003; 29:129-32. 6. Taneja N, Emmanuel R, Chari PS, Sharma M. A prospective study of hospital-acquired infections in burn patients at a tertiary care referral centre in north India. Burn 2004; 30:665-9. 7. Ozumba UC, Jiburum BC. Bacteriology of Burn Wounds in Enugu, Nigeria. Burns 2000; 26:178- 80. 8. Rastegar A, Alaghehbandan R, Akhlaghi L. Burn wound infection and antimicrobial resistance in Tehran, Iran: An increasing problem. Ann Burn Fire Disasters 2005; 18: 1115-8. 9. Tekin R, Dal T, Bozkurt F, Deveci O, Palanc Y, Arslan E, Selçuk CT, Hoşoğlu S. Risk factors for nosocomial burn wound infection caused by multidrug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. J Burn Care Res. 2014 Jan-Feb; 35 (1):e73-80. 10. Sahly H, Aucken H, Benedí VJ, et al. Increased serum resistance in Klebsiella pneumonia strains producing extendedspectrum beta-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48:3477–3482. 112 107 www.ijhbr.com ISSN: 2319-7072