ABSTRACT
Over 2 million patients developed lung cancer in 2018, and lung malignancy is responsible for an estimated 1.8 million deaths worldwide. Lung cancer diagnosis usually occurs after suspicious symptoms or incidental radiologic findings on chest imaging when the cancer is probably in an advanced stage. Therefore, initial evaluation, diagnosis, staging, and prompt treatment of lung cancer are required to improve pulmonary malignancies' morbidity and mortality rate. Unfortunately, the size of the tumor, the time of imaging, the quality and quantity of pleural fluid, and pleural biopsy all contribute to diagnostic difficulties in evaluating a lung lesion, leaving even the most astute clinician occasionally perplexed. We discuss a case of a female with lung cancer whose diagnosis was challenging because of a negative pleural biopsy, despite initial radiographic imaging suggesting a lung lesion.
ABSTRACT
Background and objective The role of the antibiogram in reducing hospital length of stay (LOS), mortality rate, health care costs, and, by extension, patients' social, physical, and emotional wellness has a significant impact on the medical community. Hospitals in large cities serve a dynamic population of diverse ethnic groups. Many scholarly works and publications have shown that the antimicrobial pattern in rural settings has significant variability annually. Over the last two years, the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has brought about many unknowns in the sphere of healthcare. The pattern of pathology accompanying COVID-19 has affected hospital policies and direct patient management, leading to a paradigm shift in approaches, policies, and resource utilization. The years 2019 to 2021 were marked by many admissions due to COVID-19, and the effects of COVID-19 are still being studied. In light of this, this study examined the changes in sensitivity patterns, new trends, and nature of bacteria isolates, antimicrobial rates, and susceptibility based on a rural hospital's annual antibiogram pertaining to its central departments: the intensive care unit (ICU), patient care unit (PCU), the outpatient unit, and emergency department (ED). Methods This five-year retrospective antibiogram review compared antibiogram patterns two years before the first case of COVID-19 was reported in the hospital and those two years after the initial outbreak. Results The organism comparative susceptibility tests for Escherichia coli (E. coli) were not significant except for increased susceptibility toward nitrofurantoin (p=0.003); Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae) was also not significant except for the increased susceptibility to ciprofloxacin (p=0.003). Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) had no changes in susceptibility patterns, while Proteus mirabilis (P. mirabilis) had increased susceptibility to imipenem (p=0.05), aztreonam (p=0.00), and meropenem (p=0.004), with reduced susceptibility to gentamicin (97.47% vs. 88.24%, p=0.006). There was a whopping decrease in the sensitivity of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) to clindamycin (75.93% vs. 50.7%, p=0.000), linezolid (99.54% vs. 88.73, p=0.004), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (92.59% vs. 74.65%, p=0.001), and vancomycin (99.54% vs. 88.73%, p=0.004). Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) had no significant variation except an increase in susceptibility to nitrofurantoin (p=0.023), and perhaps ironically, Streptococcus pneumoniae (S. pneumoniae) had no significant changes in susceptibility pattern. Conclusion Our data demonstrate that the susceptibility of different drugs against different bacterial pathogens varied. However, some antibiotic drugs were found to have high susceptibility against different isolated organisms, and these drugs include amikacin, levofloxacin, vancomycin, cefotaxime, nitrofurantoin, and ceftriaxone. Some organisms showed a significantly declined antibiotic susceptibility, while others showed a significant improvement. The role of COVID-19 regarding these changes is unknown. COVID-19 may not be the cause of the observed differences. We believe that further research on antibiotic legislation and prescribing trends is required. Other non-significant study findings may be attributed to the limited data available to us.