Distribution and Drug Resistance Analysis of Bacteria in Sterile Body Fluids in Yunnan from 2017 to 2021
-
摘要:
目的 探讨云南省无菌体液标本(不含血液)细菌的分布及耐药情况。 方法 选取2017年至2021年云南省9家三级综合医院无菌体液标本,排除同一患者重复株,使用WHONET5.6软件对药物敏感性数据进行统计分析。 结果 腹水是菌株分离率最高的标本类型,占32.7%。所有标本中共分离出5305株菌,革兰阳性菌占53.3%,分离率第一为表皮葡萄球菌;革兰阴性菌占46.7%,以大肠埃希菌为主。耐甲氧西林凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌和耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌耐药情况二者相当。屎肠球菌对于常用抗菌药耐药率呈下降的趋势。肺炎克雷伯菌对美罗培南和亚胺培南的耐药率分别为35.6%、40.3%,均高于2021年我国CHINET水平,且耐药率呈逐年升高的趋势。鲍曼不动杆菌仍保持耐多药的形式,尤其对碳青霉烯类药物耐药率高达82%。 结论 监测无菌体液病原菌来源广泛,不同菌属间碳青霉烯耐药形势严峻。仍需重点监测耐第三代头孢菌素的肠杆菌和耐碳青霉烯的肠杆菌、鲍曼不动杆菌。 Abstract:Objective To explore the bacterial distribution and drug resistance of sterile body fluid specimens (excluding blood) in nine tertiary general hospitals in Yunnan Province from 2017-2021, and to provide a reference basis for the rational clinical use of antibiotics in the region. Methods Repeated strains from the same patients were excluded, and drug sensitivity tests were performed by instrumental method or paper method, and the results were interpreted according to the 2021 CLSI standard. Results Ascites was the specimen type with the highest strain isolation rate, accounting for 32.7%. A total of 5305 strains were isolated from all specimens, with Gram-positive bacteria accounting for 53.3%, predominantly Staphylococcus epidermidis, and Gram-negative bacteria accounting for 46.7%, predominantly Escherichia coli. Methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus were comparable in both cases and should not be underestimated. Enterococcus faecalis showed a decreasing trend of resistance to commonly used antimicrobials. The resistance rates of Klebsiella pneumoniae to meropenem and imipenem were 35.6% and 40.3%, respectively, both of which were higher than the 2021 CHINET level, and the resistance rates showed a trend of increasing year by year. Acinetobacter baumannii was highly resistant to most antibiotics, especially to carbapenems with a resistance rate of 82%. Conclusion The source of pathogenic bacteria in sterile body fluid is extensive, and the form of carbapenem resistance among different genera is severe. It is still necessary to focus on monitoring the third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Acinetobacter baumannii. -
Key words:
- Sterile body fluids /
- Pathogenic bacteria /
- Drug resistance
-
表 1 无菌体液细菌构成比
Table 1. Bacterial composition ratio of sterile body fluids
细菌 n(n = 5305) 构成比( %) 革兰阳性菌 2829 53.3 表皮葡萄球菌 558 19.7 粪肠球菌 417 14.7 人葡萄球菌 315 11.1 溶血葡萄球菌 304 10.7 屎肠球菌 243 8.6 其他革兰阳性菌 992 35.1 革兰阴性菌 2476 46.7 大肠埃希菌 958 38.7 肺炎克雷伯菌 464 18.7 鲍曼不动杆菌 276 11.1 铜绿假单胞菌 126 5.1 阴沟肠杆菌 100 4.0 其他革兰阴性菌 552 22.3 表 2 MRSA和MRCNS耐药率(%)
Table 2. Drug resistance of MRSA and MRCNS to antimicrobial agents (%)
抗生素名称 MRSA
(n = 47)2017
(n = 11)2018
(n = 12)2019
(n = 8)2020
(n = 2)2021
(n = 14)MRCNS
(n = 1045)2017
(n = 191)2018
(n = 199)2019
(n = 202)2020
(n = 206)2021
(n = 250)n R n R n R/ n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R 青霉素G 47 100.0 11 100.0 12 100.0 8 100.0 2 100.0 14 100.0 1042 100.0 191 100.0 197 100.0 202 100.0 206 100.0 249 100.0 苯唑西林 47 100.0 11 100.0 12 100.0 8 100.0 2 100.0 14 100.0 1045 100.0 191 100.0 199 100.0 202 100.0 206 100.0 250 100.0 红霉素 47 85.1 11 90.9 12 75 8 75.0 2 100.0 14 92.9 1041 85.8 191 86.4 199 87.4 202 84.2 206 86.9 246 84.1 庆大霉素 47 19.1 11 18.2 12 16.7 8 12.5 2 0.0 14 28.6 1045 19.9 191 20.4 199 24.1 202 20.3 206 18.4 250 17.2 环丙沙星 39 41.0 11 63.6 12 25 7 14.3 1 100.0 5 40 824 59.7 191 57.1 199 60.8 193 55.4 113 64.6 85 67.1 左氧氟沙星 47 34.0 11 63.6 12 25.0 8 12.5 2 0.0 14 35.7 1043 63.4 191 62.3 199 65.3 202 61.9 206 65.0 248 62.5 替考拉宁 38 0.0 7 0.0 1 0.0 6 0.0 1 0.0 13 0.0 654 0.5 86 1.2 130 0.0 118 1.7 93 0.0 168 0.0 万古霉素 45 0.0 9 0.0 12 0.0 8 0.0 2 0.0 14 0.0 1023 0.0 171 0.0 198 0.0 202 0.0 205 0.0 250 0.0 利奈唑胺 44 0.0 10 0.0 10 0.0 8 0.0 2 0.0 14 0.0 1017 0.1 174 0.0 190 0.0 200 0.0 206 0.0 248 0.0 四环素 36 66.7 11 81.8 12 66.7 7 28.6 1 100.0 5 80.0 735 44.1 186 46.2 199 44.2 194 42.3 113 46.0 46 39.1 复方新诺明 47 12.8 11 27.3 12 8.3 8 0.0 2 0.0 14 14.3 1042 49.6 191 61.8 199 57.8 202 53.0 206 40.3 247 38.9 克林霉素 46 76.1 10 70 12 75.0 8 62.5 2 100.0 14 85.7 1023 57.6 187 51.3 195 59.0 202 52.0 199 60.8 243 63.0 利福平 47 14.9 11 36.4 12 16.7 8 12.5 2 0.0 14 0.0 1043 12.9 191 13.6 199 12.1 202 16.3 206 10.2 248 12.5 注:n:数量,R:耐药。 表 3 屎肠球菌和粪肠球菌耐药率(%)
Table 3. Drug resistance of E. faecium and E. faecalis to antimicrobial agents (%)
抗生素名称 屎肠球菌
(n = 417)2017年
(n = 40)2018年
(n = 64)2019年
(n = 77)2020年
(n = 72)2021年
(n = 166)粪肠球菌
(n = 417)2017年
(n = 23)2018年
(n = 24)2019年
(n = 43)2020年
(n = 45)2021年
(n = 108)n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R n R 氨苄西林 417 88.2 40 92.5 64 89.1 77 93.5 72 84.7 166 86.1 243 3.7 23 0.0 24 0.0 43 4.7 45 11.1 108 1.9 青霉素G 416 90.4 40 95.0 63 93.7 77 93.5 72 87.5 166 88.0 242 5.8 23 0.0 24 0.0 43 4.7 45 13.3 107 5.6 高浓度链霉素 322 19.9 35 37.1 63 30.2 63 14.3 36 19.4 125 12.8 201 26.9 21 33.3 24 25.0 38 34.2 28 17.9 90 25.6 高浓度庆大霉素 396 43.4 35 62.9 63 46.0 66 45.5 69 50.7 165 34.5 235 33.6 21 47.6 24 29.2 42 33.3 44 29.5 104 33.7 万古霉素 410 0.2 34 0.0 64 1.6 77 0.0 71 0.0 166 0.0 234 0.0 17 0.0 24 0.0 41 0.0 44 0.0 108 0.0 利奈唑胺 408 0.5 34 0.0 62 1.6 77 1.3 72 0.0 165 0.0 234 3.0 19 0.0 22 4.5 42 0.0 43 0.0 108 5.6 替考拉宁 263 0.8 28 3.6 41 0.0 51 2.0 41 0.0 104 0.0 195 0.5 16 0.0 15 0.0 28 0.0 33 0.0 103 1.0 红霉素 415 85.3 40 97.5 63 95.2 77 84.4 72 79.2 165 81.8 415 85.3 23 56.5 24 66.7 43 62.8 45 57.8 106 54.7 环丙沙星 341 86.8 40 92.5 63 90.5 74 87.8 38 81.6 126 84.1 241 58.1 23 13.0 24 29.2 39 15.4 28 14.3 91 26.4 左旋氧氟沙星 415 84.6 40 92.5 63 88.9 77 87.0 72 81.9 165 81.2 243 23.0 23 13.0 24 29.2 43 16.3 45 24.4 108 25.9 四环素 254 64.6 39 82.1 63 66.7 73 58.9 38 68.4 41 51.2 133 75.9 22 86.4 24 83.3 39 74.4 28 71.4 20 65.0 注:n:数量,R:耐药。 表 4 大肠埃希菌耐药率(%)
Table 4. Drug resistance of E. coli to antimicrobial agents (%)
抗生素名称 总计(n = 958) 2017(n = 123) 2018(n = 122) 2019(n = 193) 2020(n = 169) 2021(n = 355) n R n R n R n R n R n R 氨苄西林 858 88.3 123 85.4 122 92.6 173 89.0 117 83.8 326 89.3 阿莫西林/克拉维酸 948 16.7 123 13.8 122 17.2 190 20.5 166 15.7 351 15.4 氨苄西林/舒巴坦 663 43.3 41 46.3 47 48.9 115 49.6 125 44.8 338 39.6 哌拉西林/他唑巴坦 765 8.4 68 5.9 78 7.7 133 12.8 135 9.6 355 6.8 头孢唑啉 788 66.2 96 61.5 114 66.7 156 69.2 114 55.3 311 70.4 头孢呋辛 644 68.2 14 57.1 50 56.0 96 78.1 136 64.7 351 69.2 头孢曲松 950 62.5 123 54.5 122 57.4 192 66.1 166 58.4 351 67.5 头孢噻肟 783 63.1 43 60.5 94 55.3 173 66.5 152 57.9 324 66.7 头孢他啶 890 25.5 101 23.8 97 16.5 175 27.4 167 26.3 354 27.4 头孢吡肟 956 25.8 122 15.6 122 20.5 193 23.3 168 26.2 355 32.7 头孢西丁 585 17.4 42 21.4 62 16.1 71 28.2 64 20.3 350 14.9 厄他培南 918 3.1 117 0.0 119 2.5 191 4.2 150 3.3 345 3.2 美罗培南 853 2.0 101 0.0 106 1.9 175 2.3 152 2.0 323 2.5 亚胺培南 957 1.8 123 1.6 122 0.8 192 2.6 169 1.2 355 2.0 氨曲南 829 37.8 113 37.2 96 33.3 173 36.4 120 34.2 330 41.5 复方新诺明 958 59.4 123 64.2 122 64.8 193 58.0 169 52.1 355 60.3 环丙沙星 851 59.7 123 58.5 122 57.4 174 62.6 120 54.2 315 61.6 左氧氟沙星 958 54.9 123 48.8 122 45.1 193 58.5 169 54.4 355 58.6 阿米卡星 958 1.5 123 0.8 122 3.3 193 1.0 169 0.0 355 2.0 庆大霉素 858 39.3 123 35.8 122 45.9 173 37.6 117 39.3 326 39.3 妥布霉素 167 10.8 23 13 31 9.7 30 16.7 17 5.9 67 9.0 ESBL 927 61.2 122 54.1 122 52.5 192 65.1 165 58.2 330 66.7 注:n:数量,R:耐药。 表 5 肺炎克雷伯菌耐药率(%)
Table 5. Drug resistance of K.pneumoniae to antimicrobial agents (%)
抗生素名称 总计(n = 464) 2017(n = 61) 2018(n = 66) 2019(n = 104) 2020(n = 102) 2021(n = 137) n R n R n R n R n R n R 氨苄西林 220 92.3 61 91.8 66 95.5 35 85.7 17 88.2 43 95.3 阿莫西林/克拉维酸 419 45.8 61 41.0 65 43.1 104 51.9 83 54.2 111 40.5 氨苄西林/舒巴坦 247 55.5 26 61.5 19 26.3 48 64.6 45 62.2 112 53.6 哌拉西林/他唑巴坦 428 46.3 55 34.5 57 42.1 92 56.5 93 57.0 137 40.9 头孢唑啉 332 58.7 43 69.8 59 61.0 76 65.8 50 52.0 108 52.8 头孢呋辛 220 57.7 12 41.7 13 46.2 43 67.4 60 58.3 93 57.0 头孢曲松 398 56.3 61 57.4 66 54.5 79 62.0 83 57.8 114 53.5 头孢噻肟 195 51.3 26 69.2 28 21.4 69 59.4 50 52.0 25 48.0 头孢他啶 396 48.5 34 38.2 37 27.0 90 51.1 102 55.9 137 51.1 头孢吡肟 463 49.5 61 39.3 66 45.5 104 57.7 102 55.9 136 47.1 头孢西丁 301 50.8 35 37.1 52 50.0 57 64.9 52 73.1 110 40.0 厄他培南 372 33.1 43 2.3 49 18.4 98 45.9 75 49.3 110 30.9 美罗培南 340 35.6 34 26.5 37 16.2 71 38.0 70 48.6 132 37.1 亚胺培南 464 40.3 61 27.9 66 36.4 104 47.1 102 51.0 137 36.5 氨曲南 398 51.5 59 47.5 59 52.5 85 55.3 68 54.4 132 50.8 复方新诺明 464 43.8 61 39.3 66 34.8 104 51.9 102 52.0 137 39.4 环丙沙星 406 56.4 61 57.4 66 56.1 85 62.4 68 61.8 131 51.1 左氧氟沙星 464 51.9 61 47.5 66 48.5 104 56.7 102 59.8 137 48.2 阿米卡星 464 35.8 61 23.0 66 33.3 104 37.5 102 48.0 137 33.6 庆大霉素 366 41.5 61 41.0 66 43.9 85 49.4 50 42.0 108 35.2 妥布霉素 165 57.0 28 42.9 30 63.3 29 58.6 35 74.3 48 50.0 ESBL 361 40.4 61 42.6 65 26.2 95 51.6 62 46.8 83 33.7 注:n:数量,R:耐药。 表 6 鲍曼不动杆菌耐药率(%)
Table 6. Drug resistance of A. baumannii to antimicrobial agents (%)
抗生素名称 鲍曼不动杆菌(n = 276) 2017年(n = 49) 2018年(n = 50) 2019年(n = 71) 2020年(n = 48) 2021年(n = 61) n R n R n R n R n R n R 哌拉西林/他唑巴坦 165 86.7 7 100 11 72.7 46 78.3 43 90.7 60 91.7 头孢哌酮/舒巴坦 200 0.0 22 0 25 0.0 49 0.0 45 0.0 60 0.0 头孢他啶 218 83.9 48 76.2 32 75.0 59 81.4 46 89.1 61 90.2 头孢吡肟 276 81.9 49 83.7 50 78.0 71 80.3 48 87.5 61 82.0 亚胺培南 275 82.5 48 79.2 50 72.0 71 80.3 48 89.6 61 91.8 美洛培南 195 84.1 14 78.6 31 77.4 47 74.5 43 90.7 61 91.8 环丙沙星 264 81.4 48 85.4 50 72.0 63 79.4 45 82.2 61 88.5 左旋氧氟沙星 276 64.9 49 55.1 50 56.0 71 56.3 48 75.0 61 83.6 妥布霉素 173 71.1 23 78.3 18 55.6 18 55.6 21 42.9 50 34.0 庆大霉素 189 66.1 49 75.5 49 57.1 34 67.6 41 65.9 60 80.0 阿米卡星 195 48.2 22 50 25 56.0 49 59.2 25 64.0 19 89.5 氨曲南 182 87.4 48 85.4 48 87.5 62 29.0 37 40.5 50 74.0 复方新诺明 276 53.6 49 53.1 50 48.0 49 89.8 27 88.9 13 84.6 替加环素 227 0.0 34 0 31 0.0 71 0.0 48 0.0 61 0.0 粘菌素 26 3.8 - - - - 1 0.0 6 0.0 21 4.8 注:n:数量,R:耐药,“-”:无数据。 -
[1] Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobiol susceptibility[S]. 2021: M100-S31. [2] 钟敏,龙姗姗,黄湘宁,等. 2015—2018年四川地区无菌体液细菌的分布及耐药性分析[J]. 中国抗生素杂志,2019,44(10):1181-1188. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8689.2019.10.011 [3] 黄燕春,陈知行,谢轶,等. 2012年3家教学医院无菌体液病原菌分布和耐药性[J]. 中国抗生素杂志,2014,39(6):456-461. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8689.2014.06.011 [4] 刘爽,肖晓光,林琳. 2013-2015年无菌体液病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J]. 检验医学与临床,2017,14(14):2038-2041. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9455.2017.14.013 [5] 臧婉,殷勤,何建维,等. 2013-2019年无菌体液病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J]. 国际检验医学杂志,2020,41(1):65-68,73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4130.2020.01.017 [6] 秦立霞,李芳,赵会海. 感染性无菌体液细菌分布及耐药性分析[J]. 临床误诊误治,2020,33(3):77-82. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-3429.2020.03.018 [7] 郭燕,吴湜,傅祝英杰,等. 血液和无菌体液分离金黄色葡萄球菌对抗菌药物的敏感性及毒力基因检测[J]. 中国感染与化疗杂志,2017,17(2):127-133. doi: 10.16718/j.1009-7708.2017.02.002 [8] 胡付品,郭燕,朱德妹,等. 2021年CHINET中国细菌耐药监测[J]. 中国感染与化疗杂志,2022,22(5):521-530. [9] 喻华,徐雪松,李敏,等. 肠杆菌目细菌碳青霉烯酶的实验室检测和临床报告规范专家共识[J]. 中国感染与化疗杂志,2020,20(6):671-680. doi: 10.16718/j.1009-7708.2022.04.014 [10] 周文艳,张华,许永杰. 111例无菌体液标本中CRE的碳青霉烯酶检测及同源性分析[J]. 国际检验医学杂志,2022,43(12):1420-1424,1429. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4130.2022.12.003 [11] Sheu C C,Chang Y T,Lin S Y,et al. Infections caused by carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae: An update on therapeutic options[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology,2019,10:80. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00080 [12] Karaiskos I,Galani I,Papoutsaki V,et al. Carbapenemase producing Klebsiella pneumoniae: implication on future therapeutic strategies[J]. Expert Review of Anti-Infective Therapy,2022,20(1):53-69. doi: 10.1080/14787210.2021.1935237 [13] Ramirez M S,Bonomo R A,Tolmasky M E. Carbapenemases: Transforming acinetobacter baumannii into a yet more dangerous menace[J]. Biomolecules,2020,10(5):720. doi: 10.3390/biom10050720 [14] Nasr P. Genetics,epidemiology,and clinical manifestations of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii[J]. The Journal of Hospital Infection,2020,104(1):4-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2019.09.021 [15] Ni W,Cui J,LiaNg B,et al. In vitro effects of tigecycline in combination with colistin (polymyxin E) and sulbactam against multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii[J]. The Journal of Antibiotics,2013,66(12):705-708. doi: 10.1038/ja.2013.84 [16] Cai X,Yang z,Dai J,et al. Pharmacodynamics of tigecycline alone and in combination with colistin against clinical isolates of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model[J]. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents,2017,49(5):609-616. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2017.01.007 [17] Liu C,Chen K,Wu Y,et al. Epidemiological and genetic characteristics of clinical carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii strains collected countrywide from hospital intensive care units (ICUs) in China[J]. Emerging Microbes & Infections,2022,11(1):1730-1741. [18] Somily A,Balkhy H H,Enani M A S,et al. Antimicrobial resistance trends of non-fermenter Gram negative bacteria in Saudi Arabia: A six-year national study[J]. Journal of Infection and Public Health,2021,14(9):1144-1150. doi: 10.1016/j.jiph.2021.07.007 [19] Seifert H,Blondeau J,Lucaßen K,et al. Global update on the in vitro activity of tigecycline and comparators against isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii and rates of resistant phenotypes (2016-2018)[J]. Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance,2022,31:82-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2022.08.002 [20] Tacconelli E,Carrara E,Savoldi A,et al. Discovery,research,and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis[J]. The Lancet Infectious Diseases,2018,18(3):318-327. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30753-3