RESUMO
Background: Antimicrobial drug resistance in community-acquired (CA) infections is a growing problem. Knowing the local epidemiology is essential to design empirical antibiotic therapy. Therefore, we conducted this study to evaluate the resistance patterns of microorganisms isolated from surgical samples of community-acquired intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) and to determine the factors associated with resistance. Methods: We analyzed retrospectively the records of patients treated from January 2015 to June 2017 who had IAIs with positives aerobic cultures performed in the first 72 hours after admission. Surgical site infections, abdominal wall procedures, peritoneal dialysis catheters, and patients with admissions in the prior month were excluded. To identify the factors associated with resistance, we considered the resistance to the regimen recommended at our institution, ampicillin/sulbactam (AMS) plus ciprofloxacin (CIP). Results: There were 119 patients with 133 isolates, 59% women, and mean age 54 years. The main sources of infection were appendicitis (38%) and cholecystitis (20%), with 64 patients presenting a complicated IAI (cIAI), defined by the presence of peritonitis (55%). Resistance in Enterobacteriaceae was AMS 32% (6.4% intermediate resistance), CIP 31%, cefotaxime 9%, piperacillin/tazobactam (PTZ) 3%, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole 32%, gentamicin 9.5%, and amikacin 2%. Considering all patients, resistance to AMS + CIP was 16.8%. Factors associated with resistant to this regimen was, by univariable and multivariable analysis, the presence of diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] 3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-11.6; p = 0.03). Female gender (OR 2.7; CI 0.9-8.4; p = 0.08) and complicated IAI (OR 2.0; CI 0.7-5.4; p = 0.17) were associated with resistance but did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: High resistance to CIP and AMS was observed. Although the combination of AMS + CIP offers coverage for 84% of patients, PTZ should be considered as an option for patients with severe infections or diabetes mellitus. Finding factors associated with antibiotic resistance could help to select empirical therapy for CA IAIs better.
Assuntos
Complicações do Diabetes/epidemiologia , Infecções Intra-Abdominais/tratamento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/complicações , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/etiologia , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/microbiologia , Complicações do Diabetes/microbiologia , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana , Feminino , Humanos , Infecções Intra-Abdominais/complicações , Infecções Intra-Abdominais/etiologia , Infecções Intra-Abdominais/microbiologia , Masculino , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine test characteristics of provider judgment for empiric antibiotic provision to patients undergoing testing for a sexually transmitted infection. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional electronic health record review of all patients aged 13-19 years who had Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) testing sent from an urban, academic pediatric emergency department in 2012. We abstracted data, including patient demographics, chief complaint, sexually transmitted infection test results, and treatment. We calculated test characteristics comparing clinician judgment for presumptive treatment for a sexually transmitted infection with the reference standard of the actual results of testing for a sexually transmitted infection. RESULTS: Of 1223 patient visits meeting inclusion criteria, 284 (23.2%) had a positive GC and/or CT test result. Empiric treatment was provided in 615 encounters (50.3%). Provider judgment for presumptive treatment had an overall sensitivity of 67.6% (95% CI, 61.8-73.0) and a specificity of 55% (95% CI, 51.7-58.2) for accurate GC and/or CT detection. CONCLUSIONS: Many adolescents tested for GC and CT receive empiric treatment at the initial emergency department visit. Provider judgment may lack sufficient sensitivity and specificity for identifying infected patients, resulting in the potential for undertreatment of true disease, overtreatment of uninfected patients, or both.