Background: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia has emerged as an important nosocomial pathogen, capable of causing a wide spectrum of infections. Treatment is difficult because it is resistant to many antimicrobial agents, thus reducing the treatment options. The aims of this study were to describe the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns and synergistic effect of selected antimicrobial combinations against S. maltophilia isolates.Methods: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study undertaken in the Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia from April 2011 to March 2012. S. maltophilia isolated from various clinical specimens were included in the study. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was done using the epsilometer test (E-test) and interpreted according to the guidelines of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. In the synergy test, the isolates were tested against six different antimicrobial combinations.Results: In total, 84 S. maltophilia isolates were collected and analysed. According to the E-test, the antimicrobial susceptibility of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), tigecycline, and ciprofloxacin was 100%, 91.1%, and 88.9% respectively. The antimicrobial combination of TMP-SMX and ceftazidime showed the highest synergistic effect.Conclusion: TMP-SMX remains the antimicrobial of choice to treat S. maltophilia infection. TMP-SMX and ceftazidime was the most effective combination in vitro.

A 3-year-old boy presented with history of trauma to the left eye after he accidentally injured his eye with a broom stick made up from coconut skewers. There was history of cats as their pets but not dogs. Ocular examination revealed left superonasal conjunctival laceration and scleral perforation with prolapsed vitreous. Fundus examination showed minimal vitreous haemorrhage and flat retina. Conjunctiva swab at the wound site was sent for gram staining, culture, and sensitivity. He underwent scleral suturing, vitreous tap, and intravitreal injection of Ceftazidime and Amikacin. Vitreous tap was sent for gram stained, culture and sensitivity. Postoperatively, he was started empirically on IV Ciprofloxacin 160 mg BD, Guttae Ciprofloxacin, and Guttae Ceftazidime. Conjunctiva swab grewPasteurella caniswhich was sensitive to all Beta lactams, Ciprofloxacin, Chloramphenicol, and Aminoglycoside. Post-operative was uneventful, absent signs of endophthalmitis or orbital cellulitis.

Background: In real-life practice, only 20% of hospitalised pneumonia cases have an identified etiology. The usage of Legionella urine antigen test (LUAT) in developed nations revolutionised case detection rates. Accordingly, our objectives were to study the microbiological etiology for hospitalised pneumonia patients and the diagnosis of Legionella pneumonia. Methods: A prospective, observational single-centre study was conducted where all 504 cases that were consecutively admitted for pneumonia were enrolled. Blood and sputum samples obtained were used to identify pathogens using standard microbiological culture methods. The urine samples collected were tested using the ImmunocatchTM Legionella immunochromatographic (ICT) urine antigen test. Results: A microbiological diagnosis was only achieved in 104 cases (20.6%) and a Gram-negative infection predominance was observed. Culture-positive cases required longer hospitalisation (8.46 days versus 5.53 days; P < 0.001) and the higher usage of antipseudomonal antibiotics (23.1% versus 8.3%; P < 0.001). Only 3 cases (0.6%) were diagnosed with Legionella pneumonia. Conclusion: The local pathogen distribution is diverse compared to other regions. Culture-negative pneumonia is common and significantly differs from culture-positive pneumonia. Legionella pneumophila serotype 1 is not a common cause of pneumonia and LUAT did not help demystify the cause of culture-negative pneumonia.