Gestational age, birth weight, and blood culture microbial patterns in late-onset neonatal sepsis

IF 0.2 Q4 PEDIATRICS Paediatrica Indonesiana Pub Date : 2024-02-26 DOI:10.14238/pi64.1.2024.51-8
Muhammad Ramadhika, Stephen Diah Iskandar, Ivana Yapiy, Yurika Elizabeth Susanti, Marcella Amadea Wijaya, R. Rohsiswatmo
{"title":"Gestational age, birth weight, and blood culture microbial patterns in late-onset neonatal sepsis","authors":"Muhammad Ramadhika, Stephen Diah Iskandar, Ivana Yapiy, Yurika Elizabeth Susanti, Marcella Amadea Wijaya, R. Rohsiswatmo","doi":"10.14238/pi64.1.2024.51-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background The three main  causes of neonatal deaths in Indonesia according to the WHO are sepsis, prematurity, and asphyxia. A suboptimal hospital environment increases the risk of late-onset neonatal sepsis (LONS), which in turn can prolong hospital stays. \nObjective To assess for possible associations  of bacterial patterns in neonates with LONS, prematurity, and/or low birth weight. \nMethods Medical record data of 1,706 hospitalized neonates who were treated for sepsis or other disease in the Neonatal Unit, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital (CMH), Jakarta in 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. A total of 262 neonates had proven LONS. We assessed for possible risk factors such as gestational age, birth weight, and cultured blood microbes. \nResults Out of a total of 1,706 neonates admitted to the neonatal unit, the incidence of proven LONS was 15.4%. LONS was more prevalent (58.4%) in preterm than in full-term (41.6%) neonates. The majority (67.6%) of subjects with proven LONS were neonates with low birth weight (LBW) (<2,500 grams), and the largest percentage of them (35.1%) was in the 1,500-2,500-gram group. Gram negative bacteria emerged as the predominant pathogens of LONS patients in our hospital; the most common were Klebsiella pneumonia, Acinetobacter spp., Escherichia coli, Enterobacter spp., and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. \nConclusion The proportion of LONS among LBW and preterm neonates is significantly higher compared to normal birth weight and  neonates. In our unit, LONS was mostly caused by Gram-negative bacteria. The antibiotic susceptibility of the various pathogens causing LONS in CMH should be tested and compared to the current empirical antibiotic guidelines used in CMH.","PeriodicalId":19660,"journal":{"name":"Paediatrica Indonesiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paediatrica Indonesiana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14238/pi64.1.2024.51-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background The three main  causes of neonatal deaths in Indonesia according to the WHO are sepsis, prematurity, and asphyxia. A suboptimal hospital environment increases the risk of late-onset neonatal sepsis (LONS), which in turn can prolong hospital stays. Objective To assess for possible associations  of bacterial patterns in neonates with LONS, prematurity, and/or low birth weight. Methods Medical record data of 1,706 hospitalized neonates who were treated for sepsis or other disease in the Neonatal Unit, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital (CMH), Jakarta in 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. A total of 262 neonates had proven LONS. We assessed for possible risk factors such as gestational age, birth weight, and cultured blood microbes. Results Out of a total of 1,706 neonates admitted to the neonatal unit, the incidence of proven LONS was 15.4%. LONS was more prevalent (58.4%) in preterm than in full-term (41.6%) neonates. The majority (67.6%) of subjects with proven LONS were neonates with low birth weight (LBW) (<2,500 grams), and the largest percentage of them (35.1%) was in the 1,500-2,500-gram group. Gram negative bacteria emerged as the predominant pathogens of LONS patients in our hospital; the most common were Klebsiella pneumonia, Acinetobacter spp., Escherichia coli, Enterobacter spp., and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Conclusion The proportion of LONS among LBW and preterm neonates is significantly higher compared to normal birth weight and  neonates. In our unit, LONS was mostly caused by Gram-negative bacteria. The antibiotic susceptibility of the various pathogens causing LONS in CMH should be tested and compared to the current empirical antibiotic guidelines used in CMH.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
晚期新生儿败血症的妊娠年龄、出生体重和血培养微生物模式
背景 据世界卫生组织(WHO)称,在印度尼西亚,新生儿死亡的三大主要原因是败血症、早产和窒息。不理想的医院环境会增加晚发新生儿败血症(LONS)的风险,进而延长住院时间。目的 评估新生儿细菌模式与 LONS、早产和/或低出生体重之间可能存在的关联。方法 对 2020 年在雅加达 Cipto Mangunkusumo 医生医院(CMH)新生儿科接受败血症或其他疾病治疗的 1,706 名住院新生儿的病历数据进行回顾性分析。共有262名新生儿被证实患有LONS。我们评估了可能的风险因素,如胎龄、出生体重和培养出的血液微生物。结果 在新生儿科收治的 1706 名新生儿中,经证实的 LONS 发生率为 15.4%。早产儿(58.4%)比足月新生儿(41.6%)更容易感染 LONS。大多数(67.6%)被证实患有LONS的新生儿为低出生体重(LBW)新生儿(<2,500克),其中1,500-2,500克组所占比例最大(35.1%)。革兰氏阴性菌是本院 LONS 患者的主要病原体,其中最常见的是肺炎克雷伯菌、醋氨梭菌属、大肠埃希菌、肠杆菌属和铜绿假单胞菌。结论 与出生体重正常的新生儿相比,低体重儿和早产儿的 LONS 比例明显较高。在我院,LONS 主要由革兰氏阴性菌引起。应检测在 CMH 引起 LONS 的各种病原体的抗生素敏感性,并与 CMH 目前使用的经验性抗生素指南进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Complete atrioventricular block in an adolescent with acute rheumatic fever: a case report Shared medical appointments and quality of life for children with HIV-AIDS Effects of non-pharmacological methods on post-operative procedural pain management in neonates admitted in the neonatal intensive care unit: A systematic review Challenges in the management of pediatric ruptured brain arteriovenous malformation: a case report Gestational age, birth weight, and blood culture microbial patterns in late-onset neonatal sepsis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1