scholarly journals Ramoplanin: a novel antimicrobial agent with the potential to prevent vancomycin-resistant enterococcal infection in high-risk patients

2003 ◽  
Vol 51 (90003) ◽  
pp. 31iii-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Montecalvo
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Antimicrobial Agent ◽  
Enterococcal Infection ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Vancomycin Resistant

scholarly journals Risk Factors for New Detection of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci in Acute-Care Hospitals That Employ Strict Infection Control Procedures

2003 ◽  
Vol 47 (8) ◽  
pp. 2492-2498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander A. Padiglione ◽  
Rory Wolfe ◽  
Elizabeth A. Grabsch ◽  
Di Olden ◽  
Stephen Pearson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Broad Spectrum ◽  
Rectal Swab ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Vancomycin Resistant

ABSTRACT Accurate assessment of the risk factors for colonization with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) among high-risk patients is often confounded by nosocomial VRE transmission. We undertook a 15-month prospective cohort study of adults admitted to high-risk units (hematology, renal, transplant, and intensive care) in three teaching hospitals that used identical strict infection control and isolation procedures for VRE to minimize nosocomial spread. Rectal swab specimens for culture were regularly obtained, and the results were compared with patient demographic factors and antibiotic exposure data. Compliance with screening was defined as “optimal” (100% compliance) or “acceptable” (minor protocol violations were allowed, but a negative rectal swab specimen culture was required within 1 week of becoming colonized with VRE). Colonization with VRE was detected in 1.56% (66 of 4,215) of admissions (0.45% at admission and 0.83% after admission; the acquisition time was uncertain for 0.28%), representing 1.91% of patients. No patients developed infection with VRE. The subsequent rate of new acquisition of VRE was 1.4/1,000 patient days. Renal units had the highest rate (3.23/1,000 patient days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.54 to 6.77/1,000 patient days). vanB Enterococcus faecium was the most common species (71%), but other species included vanB Enterococcus faecalis (21%), vanA E. faecium (6%), and vanA E. faecalis (2%). The majority of isolates were nonclonal by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis. Multivariate analysis of risk factors in patients with an acceptable screening suggested that being managed by a renal unit (hazard ratio [HR] compared to the results for patients managed in an intensive care unit, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2 to 17.0 [P = 0.02]) and recent administration of either ticarcillin-clavulanic acid (HR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1 to 11.6 [P = 0.03]) or carbapenems (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.0, 8.0 [P = 0.05]), but not vancomycin or broad-spectrum cephalosporins, were associated with acquisition of VRE. The relatively low rates of colonization with VRE, the polyclonal nature of most isolates, and the possible association with the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics are consistent with either the endogenous emergence of VRE or the amplification of previously undetectable colonization with VRE among high-risk patients managed under conditions in which the risk of nosocomial acquisition was minimized.

scholarly journals Single-Dose Oral Amoxicillin or Linezolid for Prophylaxis of Experimental Endocarditis Due to Vancomycin-Susceptible and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecalis

2007 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 1661-1665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Moreillon ◽  
Walter R. Wilson ◽  
Roland Leclercq ◽  
José M. Entenza
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Enterococcus Faecalis ◽  
Resistant Isolate ◽  
Moderate Risk ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Oral Amoxicillin ◽  
Dose Oral ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Vancomycin Resistant

ABSTRACT Endocarditis prophylaxis following genitourinary or gastrointestinal procedures targets Enterococcus faecalis. Prophylaxis recommendations advocate oral amoxicillin (2 g in the United States and 3 g in the United Kingdom) in moderate-risk patients and intravenous amoxicillin (2 g) or vancomycin (1 g) plus gentamicin in high-risk patients. While ampicillin-resistant (or amoxicillin-resistant) E. faecalis is still rare, there is a concern that these regimens might fail against vancomycin-resistant and/or aminoglycoside-resistant isolates. The present study tested oral linezolid as an alternative. Rats with catheter-induced aortic vegetations were given prophylaxis simulating human pharmacokinetics of oral amoxicillin (2- to 3-g single dose), oral linezolid (600 mg, single or multiple oral doses every 12 h), or intravenous vancomycin (1-g single dose). Rats were then inoculated with the minimum inoculum infecting 90% of the animals (90% infective dose [ID90]) or with 10 times the ID90 of the vancomycin-susceptible E. faecalis strain JH2-2 or the vancomycin-resistant (VanA phenotype) E. faecalis strain UCN41. Amoxicillin was also tested with two additional vancomycin-susceptible E. faecalis strains, 309 and 1209. Animals were sacrificed 3 days later. All the tested bacteria were susceptible to amoxicillin and gentamicin. Single-dose amoxicillin provided 100% protection against all four isolates at both the ID90 and 10 times the ID90. In contrast, linezolid required up to four consecutive doses to provide full protection against the vancomycin-resistant isolate. Vancomycin protected only against the vancomycin-susceptible strain. The high efficacy of single-dose oral amoxicillin suggests that this regimen could be used for prophylaxis in both moderate-risk and high-risk patients without additional aminoglycosides. Linezolid appears to be less reliable, at least against the vancomycin-resistant strain.

scholarly journals Intestinal carriage of vancomycin‐resistant Enterococcus spp. among high‐risk patients in university hospitals in Serbia: first surveillance report

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Janjusevic ◽  
Ljiljana Markovic Denic ◽  
Rajna Minic ◽  
Anita Grgurevic ◽  
Ivana Cirkovic
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Genetic Relatedness ◽  
Virulence Gene ◽  
Microtiter Plate ◽  
Close Monitoring ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Vancomycin Resistant

Abstract Background The screening for intestinal carriage of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE) among high risk patients in the Balkan region and molecular epidemiology of VRE is insufficiently investigated, yet it could be of key importance in infection control. The aim of this study was to provide baseline data on VRE intestinal carriage among high-risk patients in Serbian university hospitals, to determine the phenotypic/genotypic profiles of the isolated VRE, to obtain knowledge of local resistance patterns and bridge the gaps in current VRE surveillance. Methods The VRE reservoir was investigated using stool samples from 268 inpatients. Characterization of isolated VRE stains consisted of BD Phoenix system, genotypic identification, glycopeptide and quinupristin–dalfopristin (Q–D) resistance probing, virulence gene (esp, hyl, efaA, asa1, gelE, cpd) detection and MLVA. Biofilm formation was evaluated by the microtiter plate method. Results VRE carriage prevalence among at-risk patients was 28.7%. All VRE strains were vanA positive multidrug-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRfm), harboring ermB-1 (38.9%), esp (84%), efaA (71.2%), hyl (54.5%), asa1 (23.4%), gelE and cpd (11.6%) each. Ability of biofilm production was detected in 20.8%. Genetic relatedness of the isolates revealed 13 clusters, heterogeneous picture and 25 unique MTs profiles. Conclusion The obtained prevalence of VRE intestinal carriage among high-risk inpatients in Serbia is higher than the European average, with high percentage of multidrug resistance. The emergence of resistance to Q–D is of particular concern. Close monitoring of pattern of resistance and strict adherence to specific guidelines are urgently needed in Serbia.

Combination of norfloxacin and cisapride in prevention of SBP in high risk patients: A new approach

2001 ◽  
Vol 120 (5) ◽  
pp. A376-A376
Author(s):  
B JEETSANDHU ◽  
R JAIN ◽  
J SINGH ◽  
M JAIN ◽  
J SHARMA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
New Approach ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

1610: High-Risk Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy Today are Less High-Risk than in the Past

2005 ◽  
Vol 173 (4S) ◽  
pp. 436-436
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Kane ◽  
Martha K. Terris ◽  
William J. Aronson ◽  
Joseph C. Presti ◽  
Christopher L. Amling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
The Past ◽  
Risk Patients
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document