4.5 Article

Clinical and microbiological characteristics of pyogenic liver abscess in a tertiary hospital in East China

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 96, 期 37, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008050

关键词

antibiotic resistance; Klebsiella pneumonia; pyogenic liver abscess

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology of Zhejiang Province [2016C33133]
  2. National Key Basic Research Program (973) of China [2013CB531605]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pyogenic liver abscess (PLA) is a potentially life-threatening disease affecting many parts of the world, especially Asia. In this study, we explored the clinical and microbiological characteristics of PLA in Chinese patients. A 5-year (2010-2014) retrospective review of medical records on all PLA patients who were admitted to a tertiary teaching hospital was performed. Among 217 PLA cases who were confirmed cultural positive, Klebsiella pneumonia (K pneumonia) was the most common pathogen (n= 165, 76.0%), followed by Escherichia coli (n= 21, 9.7%). Notably, there is a higher incidence of diabetes mellitus in patients with K pneumoniae-induced PLA (KP-PLA) than that with non-K pneumoniae-induced PLA (non-KP-PLA)(43.0% vs 21.2%, P=. 005). However, it was less prevalent for concomitant hepatobiliary disease (20.0% vs 34.6%, P=. 039) and history of intraabdominal trauma or surgery (13.3% vs 38.5%, P<. 001) in patients with KP-PLA. Although K pneumoniae are sensitive to most common antibiotics (antibiotic resistance rates below 10%), some strains (1.2%) developed resistant to carbapenem. These results confirmed K pneumoniae as the predominant pathogen of PLA in the area in which the study was conducted. More attention should be directed toward monitoring the emergence of carbapenem-resistant K pneumoniae. KP-PLA is frequently diagnosed in patients with metabolic diseases accompanied by serious consequences, and it is therefore prudent to see that they receive sensitivity-directed antibiotic therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据