Comparison of Unit-Specific and Hospital-Wide Antibiograms Potential Implications for Selection of Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 682-687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn Binkley ◽  
Neil O. Fishman ◽  
Lori A. LaRosa ◽  
Ann Marie Marr ◽  
Irving Nachamkin ◽  
...  

Objective.To identify differences between unit-specific and hospital-wide antibiograms and to determine the potential impact of these differences on selection of empirical antimicrobial therapy.Setting.A 625-bed tertiary care medical center.Methods.Antimicrobial susceptibility results were collected for all inpatient clinical bacterial isolates recovered over a 3-year period; isolates were categorized by the hospital location of the patient at the time of sampling and by the anatomic site from which the isolate was recovered. Antibiograms from each unit were compiled for the most commonly isolated organisms and were compared to the hospital-wide antibiogram.Results.A total of 9,970 bacterial isolates were evaluated in this study, including 2,646 enterococcal isolates, 2,806 S. aureus isolates, 2,795 E. coli isolates, and 1,723 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. The percentages of bacterial isolates resistant to antimicrobials were significantly higher in the medical ICU and surgical ICU than the hospital-wide antibiogram would have predicted, whereas the percentages of isolates susceptible to antimicrobials were significantly higher in the non-ICU units, compared with the hospital overall. However, on general medicine units, the prevalence of susceptibility to levofloxacin was significantly lower than that for the hospital overall.Conclusions.Unit-specific antibiograms are important for making informed decisions about empirical antimicrobial therapy, because the hospital-wide antibiogram may mask important differences in susceptibility rates across different units. These differences may have important implications for selecting the optimal empirical antimicrobial therapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S226-S226
Author(s):  
Thinh Nguyen ◽  
Sudheer Surpure ◽  
Leonor Echevarria

Abstract Background Osteomyelitis of the jaw is a relatively rare entity in the post antibiotic era. The aim of this study is to describe clinical characteristics, microbiology and antibiotics use (oral vs intravenous) for treatment. We review 5 years of experience at Banner University Medical Center-Phoenix (BUMC-P) of proven cases of OM jaw by clinical, pathological, radiological criteria. Methods Retrospective study of cases. From January 2011 to November 2015 ,157 cases of osteomyelitis of the jaw, we excluded cases of radiation therapy or neoplasia to the head and neck region, a history of antiresorptive medication use. A total of 34 patients with diagnosis of osteomyelitis of the jaw were reviewed. All patients met criteria for diagnosis of osteomyelitis and underwent surgical debridement and received antibiotics that included parenteral, orals and combined. We reviewed clinical, microbiology, antibiotic use. A successful outcome was defined as elimination of clinical symptoms, restoration of function and if available radiographic evidence of arrest and resolution of bony necrosis. Results This retrospective study involved 34 patients. Most common organisms were oropharyngeal flora 22 samples (65%): streptococcus anginosus group. 4 samples grew unusual gram negative bacteria. 10 (29%) samples grew fungal species. Antimicrobial regimen was divided in: intravenous (n=14) (41.2%), oral (n=7) (20.6%) and combination intravenous followed by orals as follows: 13 (38.2 %).The average antibiotic duration was 8.1 + 4.7 weeks. We were able to follow up 30 patients, average follow up was 32.1-44.7 weeks. The overall success rate was (n=24) 80% with uneventful healing and. (n=6) (20%) treatment failure. There was more failure in the oral antibiotics group (n=3). Conclusion This study is limited by small numbers. Surgery and cultures should guide treatment of osteomyelitis of the jaw. The use of oral antimicrobial therapy was associated to a higher likelihood of treatment failure. Although rarely linked as a cause of osteomyelitis, the authors think that the cultivation of candida spp should prompt appropriate coverage. More study is required to understand the efficacy of oral antimicrobial therapy in treating osteomyelitis of the jaw. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (18) ◽  
pp. 3123
Author(s):  
Anish Samuel ◽  
Ashesha Mechineni ◽  
Robin Craven ◽  
Wilbert Aronow ◽  
Mourad Ismail ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 09 (06) ◽  
pp. E888-E894
Author(s):  
Nichol S. Martinez ◽  
Sumant Inamdar ◽  
Sheila N. Firoozan ◽  
Stephanie Izard ◽  
Calvin Lee ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and study aims There are conflicting data regarding the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) with self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) compared to polyethylene stents (PS) in malignant biliary obstructions and limited data related to benign obstructions. Patients and methods A retrospective cohort study was performed of 1136 patients who underwent ERCP for biliary obstruction and received SEMS or PS at a tertiary-care medical center between January 2011 and October 2016. We evaluated the association between stent type (SEMS vs PS) and PEP in malignant and benign biliary obstructions. Results Among the 1136 patients included in our study, 399 had SEMS placed and 737 had PS placed. Patients with PS were more likely to have pancreatic duct cannulation, pancreatic duct stent placement, double guidewire technique, sphincterotomy and sphincteroplasty as compared to the SEMS group. On multivariate analysis, PEP rates were higher in the SEMS group (8.0 %) versus the PS group (4.8 %) (OR 2.27 [CI, 1.22, 4.24]) for all obstructions. For malignant obstructions, PEP rates were 7.8 % and 6.6 % for SEMS and plastic stents, respectively (OR 1.54 [CI, 0.72, 3.30]). For benign obstructions the PEP rate was higher in the SEMS group (8.8 %) compared to the PS group (4.2 %) (OR 3.67 [CI, 1.50, 8.97]). No significant differences between PEP severity were identified based on stent type when stratified based on benign and malignant. Conclusions PEP rates were higher when SEMS were used for benign obstruction as compared to PS. For malignant obstruction, no difference was identified in PEP rates with use of SEMS vs PS.


2016 ◽  
Vol 127 (10) ◽  
pp. 3335-3340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kapil Gururangan ◽  
Babak Razavi ◽  
Josef Parvizi

1999 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 408-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray A. Abramson ◽  
Daniel J. Sexton

Objective:To determine the attributable hospital stay and costs for nosocomial methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistantS aureus(MRSA) primary bloodstream infections (BSIs).Design:Pairwise-matched (1:1) nested case-control study.Setting:University-based tertiary-care medical center.Patients:Patients admitted between December 1993 and March 1995 were eligible. Cases were defined as patients with a primary nosocomialS aureusBSI; controls were selected according to a priori matching criteria.Measurements:Length of hospital stay and total and variable direct costs of hospitalization.Results:The median hospital stay attributable to primary nosocomial MSSA BSI was 4 days, compared with 12 days for MRSA (P=.023). Attributable median total cost for MSSA primary nosocomial BSIs was $9,661 versus $27,083 for MRSA nosocomial infections (P=.043).Conclusion:Nosocomial primary BSI due toS aureussignificantly prolongs the hospital stay. Primary nosocomial BSIs due to MRSA result in an approximate threefold increase in direct cost, compared with those due to MSSA.


2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel C. Vallejo ◽  
Ahmed F. Attaallah ◽  
Robert E. Shapiro ◽  
Osama M. Elzamzamy ◽  
Michael G. Mueller ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 705-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina A. Assoumou ◽  
Wei Huang ◽  
C. Robert Horsburgh ◽  
Mus ◽  
Benjamin P. Linas

2001 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 530-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. K. Ngutter ◽  
J. M. Koler ◽  
C. H. McCollough ◽  
R. J. Vetter

2011 ◽  
pp. P3-450-P3-450
Author(s):  
Jeremy R Grogg ◽  
Pooja Singal ◽  
Abhilasha Jarori ◽  
James P Walsh

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document