4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

The Role of Patient-to-Patient Transmission in the Acquisition of Imipenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Colonization in the Intensive Care Unit

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 200, Issue 6, Pages 900-905

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/605408

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01 RR 16500, M01 RR016500, K12 RR023250, K12 RR 023250-03] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI 60859-01A1, R01 AI060859-05A1, K24 AI079040, R01 AI060859] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (IRPA) is an emerging problem. The causal role of antibiotic selective pressure versus patient-to-patient transmission has not been assessed using a large cohort. Methods. Patients who were admitted to the medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) at the University of Maryland Medical Center from 2001 through 2006 had multiple perianal culture samples collected. Using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), the number of patients who acquired IRPA as a result of patient-to-patient transmission was determined. We also analyzed a subset of patients who had a previous surveillance culture that grew an imipenem-susceptible P. aeruginosa (ISPA) and a subsequent culture that grew IRPA. Results. Our cohort consisted of 7071 patients. Three hundred patients were colonized with IRPA. 151 patients had positive culture findings at ICU admission, and 149 patients acquired an IRPA. Among the patients who acquired IRPA, 46 (31%) had a PFGE pattern similar to that for another isolate, and 38 (26%) were found to be colonized with an ISPA on the basis of earlier culture results. Of the 38-patient subset, 28 (74%) had identical PFGE patterns. Conclusions. Our data showed that, of those cases of IRPA acquisition, 46 (31%) were defined as cases of patient-to-patient transmission, and 28 (19%) were cases of acquisition by the patients' endogenous flora.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available