Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Ital J Pediatr ; 48(1): 67, 2022 May 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1951286

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is highly prevalent worldwide and can cause severe diseases. MRSA is associated with other antibiotic resistance. COVID-19 pandemic increased antimicrobial resistance in adult patients. Only a few data report the antimicrobial susceptibility of S. aureus in the Italian pediatric population, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We included all the S. aureus positive samples with an available antibiogram isolated from pediatric patients (< 18 years old) in a tertiary care hospital in Milan, Italy, from January 2017 to December 2021. We collected data on demographics, antimicrobial susceptibility, and clinical history. We compared methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and MRSA strains. We calculated the frequency of isolation by year. The incidence of isolates during 2020 was compared with the average year isolation frequency using the univariate Poisson test. We compared the proportion of MRSA isolates during 2020 to the average proportion of other years with the Chi-squared test. RESULTS: Our dataset included a total of 255 S. aureus isolated from 226 patients, 120 (53%) males, and 106 (47%) females, with a median age of 3.4 years (IQR 0.8 - 10.5). The mean isolation frequency per year was 51. We observed a significant decrease of isolations during 2020 (p = 0.02), but after adjusting for the total number of hospitalization per year there was no evidence that the incidence changed. Seventy-six (30%) S. aureus were MRSA. Twenty (26%) MRSA vs 23 (13%) MSSA (p = 0.02) were hospital-acquired. MRSA strains showed higher resistance to cotrimoxazole, clindamycin, macrolides, levofloxacin, gentamicin, and tetracyclin than MSSA strains. None of MRSA were resistant to linezolid and vancomycin, one was resistant to daptomycin. The proportion of MRSA did not change during the COVID-19 pandemic. The overall clindamycin resistance was high (17%). Recent antibiotic therapy was related to MRSA infection. CONCLUSION: The proportion of MRSA did not change during the COVID-19 pandemic and remained high. Clindamycin should not be used as an empirical MRSA treatment due to its high resistance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Staphylococcal Infections , Adolescent , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Clindamycin/pharmacology , Clindamycin/therapeutic use , Female , Hospitals, Pediatric , Humans , Infant , Male , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Pandemics , Staphylococcal Infections/drug therapy , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Staphylococcus aureus , Tertiary Healthcare
3.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 26(8): 1939-1941, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-133114
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL