In vitro susceptibilities of aerobic and facultatively anaerobic Gram-negative bacilli isolated from patients with intra-abdominal infections worldwide: 2004 results from SMART (Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends)

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance among GNB isolated from intra-abdominal infections continued to be a problem worldwide in 2004, with the highest rates of resistance overall in the Asia/Pacific region. The carbapenems and amikacin were the most consistently active agents in vitro against Enterobacteriaceae isolated from intra-abdominal infections worldwide.

Klebsiella ESBL bacteremia-mortality and risk factors

“…The Europe (Northern and Southern) in the SMART study with only 17% ESBL-producers Klebsiella spp. 6 Data from the MYSTIC study from South America showed 52% of resistance to cefepime, which can be a surrogate for ESBL strains. 7 Use of beta-lactam antibiotics containing an oxyimino group (cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, or aztreonam) are risk factors for ESBL-KP.…”

Factores asociados a infecciones urinarias producidas por enterobacterias productoras de β-lactamasas de espectro extendido: una cohorte prospectiva

“…Esta cifra está dentro de lo esperable en base a estudios previos, si bien la frecuencia es muy variable en la literatura médica con variaciones regionales marcadas 19 . El estudio SMART que reunió 6.156 cultivos de infecciones intra-abdominales por bacilos gramnegativos en 28 países, incluido Latinoamérica, mostró una prevalencia en el caso de microorganismos productores de BLEE de 17% para K. pneumoniae y 10% para E. coli 20 .…”

High Rate of Intestinal Colonization with Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-Producing Organisms in Household Contacts of Infected Community Patients

“…The presence of these pathogens in the bowel is considered to be a risk factor for infections with these bacteria (28). Moreover, it can explain the high rates of isolation of ESBL-producing organisms in certain anatomic locations (i.e., abdominal and urinary tract infections) compared to the rates seen in others where there is not a clear indication of the presence of endogenous microbiota (28). It is of note that our 70% figure is similar to that seen with hospitalized patients under high antimicrobial selective pressure (17,23).…”

“…It is of note that our 70% figure is similar to that seen with hospitalized patients under high antimicrobial selective pressure (17,23). Around 50% of our patients received antimicrobial treatment (18 patients) or medical assistance outside of the hospital setting (22 patients) at least 2 months before incurring ESBL infections; those conditions have been defined as risk factors for colonization with these pathogens (28).…”