Bacteriological aspects of catheter cultures: study over 24 months.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Maleb Adil
Ghazouani Mohammed
Chadli Mariama
Elouennass Mostafa

Abstract

Background : Catheter-related infections are the sixth leading cause of nosocomial infections with approximately 7% of cases.

Aim : The aim of this work was to establish the bacterial epidemiology of the catheter and TIC culture (totally implantable catheter) at the Mohamed V Military Teaching Hospital (MVHMI), and to study the antibiotic susceptibility of bacteria isolated. Methods: this is a retrospective study over 24 months, including the venous and arterial catheters as well as the TIC treated at the Microbiology laboratory of the MVHMI. The culture was realized by the quantitative Brun Buisson method. The antibiotic susceptibility was made according to the French Society guidelines.

Results : We have collected 282 cases with 255 catheters and 27 TIC. The significant rate culture was 51,42% (n=145) for catheters and TIC, including 90,43% catheters and 9,57% TIC. These catheters and TIC with positive culture emanated primarily from hemodialysis (32,41%) and surgical intensive care unit (28,97%) services. The microorganisms distribution by species showed the prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus (15,91%) followed by Acinetobacter baumannii (14,77%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (7,39%). The meticilline resistance rate in Staphylococcus aureus was 7,14%. The Acinetobacter baumannii resistance rate was 64%, and 80,8% for imipenem and ceftazidime respectively. The rate of resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to imipenem and ceftazidime was 69.23% for each.

Conclusion: The bacterial epidemiology of the catheters and TIC cultures is dominated by the potentially nosocomial bacteria. Multidrug resistance of A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa requires an improved catheters management and strengthening nosocomial infections prevention.

Keywords:

Catheters, epidemiology, resistance

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Baumert J, Plewig G, Volkenandt M, Schmid-Wendtner MH. Factors associated with a high tumour thickness in patients with melanoma. Br J Dermatol 2007.
  2. Giblin AV, Thomas JM. Incidence, mortality and survival in cutaneous melanoma. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007; 60: 32-40.
  3. Fazaa B, Zghal M, Bailly C, et al. [Melanoma in xeroderma pigmentosum: 12 cases]. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2001; 128: 503-6.
  4. ArmstrongBK,KrickerA.Cutaneousmelanoma.CancerSurv 1994; 19-20: 219-40
  5. Serraino D, Fratino L, Gianni W, et al. Epidemiological aspects of cutaneous malignant melanoma (review). Oncol Rep 1998; 5: 905-9.
  6. Volkovova K, Bilanicova D, Bartonova A, Letasiova S, Dusinska M. Associations between environmental factors and incidence of cutaneous melanoma. Review. Environ Health 2012; 11 Suppl 1: S12.
  7. Naser N. Cutaneous melanoma: a 30-year-long epidemiological study conducted in a city in southern Brazil, from 1980-2009. An Bras Dermatol 2011; 86: 932-41.
  8. Chang JW, Yeh KY, Wang CH, et al. Malignant melanoma in Taiwan: a prognostic study of 181 cases. Melanoma Res 2004; 14: 537-41.
  9. Reguiai Z, Jovenin N, Bernard P, Derancourt C. Melanoma, past severe sunburns and multiple solar lentigines of the upper back and shoulders. Dermatology 2008; 216: 330-6.
  10. Loggie BW, Eddy JA. Solar considerations in the development of cutaneous melanoma. Semin Oncol 1988; 15: 494-9.
  11. Pinarbasi A, Savas B, Ciftcioglu MA, Alpsoy E. Cutaneous melanoma cases observed in Antalya from 1994 to 2003: clinical and demographical properties. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2006; 20: 620-1.
  12. Rao TN, Bhagyalaxmi A, Ahmed K, Mohana Rao TSVenkatachalam K. A case of melanoma in xeroderma pigmentosum. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2009; 52: 524-6
  13. Algazi AP, Soon CW, Daud AI. Treatment of cutaneous melanoma: current approaches and future prospects. Cancer Manag Res 2010; 2: 197-211.
  14. Zell JA, Cinar P, Mobasher M, Ziogas A, Meyskens FL, Jr.Anton-Culver H.Survival for patientswith invasive cutaneousmelanoma among ethnic groups: the effects of socioeconomic status and treatment. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 66-75.
  15. Cummins DL, Cummins JM, Pantle H, Silverman MA, Leonard AL, Chanmugam A. Cutaneous malignant melanoma. Mayo Clin Proc 2006; 81: 500-7.
  16. Aviles-Izquierdo JA, Lazaro-Ochaita P. Histological ulceration as a prognostic factor in cutaneous melanoma: a study of 423 cases in Spain. Clin Transl Oncol 2012; 14: 237-40.
  17. Thompson JF, Scolyer RA, Uren RF. Surgical management of primary cutaneous melanoma: excision margins and the role of sentinel lymph node examination. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2006; 15: 301-18
  18. Thomas JM, Giblin V. Cure of cutaneous melanoma. BMJ 2006; 332: 987-8.
  19. Allan C, Smithers BM. Surgery and the management of cutaneous melanoma. Br J Surg 2013; 100: 313-5
  20. Cochran AJ, Bailly C, Cook M, et al. Recommendations for the reporting of tissues removed as part of the surgical treatment of cutaneousmelanoma. The Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Am J Clin Pathol 1998; 110: 719-22.
  21. Van den Broek FJ, Sloots PC, de Waard JW, Roumen RM. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for cutaneous melanoma: results of 10 years' experience in two regional training hospitals in the Netherlands. Int J Clin Oncol 2012.
  22. Vidal M, Vidal-Sicart S, Torrents A, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of lymphoscintigraphy for sentinel node detection in patients with cutaneous melanoma. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 1193-9.
  23. Hayes AJ, Clark MA, Harries M, Thomas JM. Management of in-transit metastases from cutaneous malignant melanoma. Br J Surg 2004; 91: 673-82
  24. Rossi CR, Foletto M, Pilati P, Mocellin S, Lise M. Isolated limb perfusion in locally advanced cutaneous melanoma. Semin Oncol 2002; 29: 400-9.
  25. Retsas S, Henry K, Mohammed MQ, MacRae K. Prognostic factors of cutaneous melanoma and a new staging system proposed by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC): validation in a cohort of 1284 patients. Eur J Cancer 2002; 38: 511-6.