STATUS OF ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE OF STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS STRAINS CAUSING WOUND INFECTIONS AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 103 IN 2022

Hạ Long Hải Lê, Văn An Nguyễn

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the antibiotic resistance status of Staphylococcus aureus strains causing wound infections at Military Hospital 103 in 2022. Subjects and methods: This is a cross-sectional study determining the antimicrobial resistance profile of Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from wound exudates of patients at Military Hospital 103 in 2022. Results: A total of 195 pathogenic agents were isolated from wound exudates in 2022, of which 60 (30.8%) were Staphylococcus aureus. The study results showed that S. aureus was highly resistant to erythromycin and clindamycin (81.7%), followed by cefoxitin (80.0%) and tetracycline (71.7%). Conversely, some antibiotics showed lower resistance rates, such as trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (20.0%), gentamicin (16.7%), levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and moxifloxacin (15.0%), and rifampin (1.7%). Antibiotics such as tigecycline, vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid, quinupristin-dalfopristin, and nitrofurantoin were completely sensitive to S. aureus strains. Among the isolated Staphylococcus aureus strains, 80% were Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), with the highest proportion found in surgical wards (60.4%) and patients from 41 to 65 years old (45.0%). Conclusion: The antibiotic resistance rate of S. aureus strains was alarmingly high, especially MRSA. S. aureus was the highest resistant to erythromycin, clindamycin, cefoxitin, and tetracycline. This research serves as a call to action for healthcare professionals, policymakers, and stakeholders to collaborate closely to protect antibiotic efficacy and ensure public health

Article Details

References

Đinh Thị Ngân Hà, Hồ Viết Thế. Khảo sát nguyên nhân gây nhiễm trùng vết thương và đánh giá khả năng kháng kháng sinh của vi khuẩn Staphylococcus aureus tại bệnh viện quân y 175.
2. CLSI (2022) Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing 32nd ed. CLSI supplement M100.
3. Akpaka PE, Kissoon S, Swanston WH, Monteil M (2006) Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from Trinidad & Tobago. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob.5:16.
4. Almuhayawi MS, Alruhaili MH, Gattan HS, Alharbi MT, Nagshabandi M, Al Jaouni S, et al. (2023) Staphylococcus aureus Induced Wound Infections Which Antimicrobial Resistance, Methicillin- and Vancomycin-Resistant: Assessment of Emergence and Cross Sectional Study. Infect Drug Resist.16:5335-46.
5. Amy L. Leber (2016) Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, : ASM Press.
6. Francois P, Pittet D, Bento M, Pepey B, Vaudaux P, Lew D, et al. (2003) Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus directly from sterile or nonsterile clinical samples by a new molecular assay. J Clin Microbiol.41(1):254-60.
7. Kaur H, Purwar S, Saini A, Kaur H, Karadesai SG, Kholkute SD, et al., editors. Status of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections and Evaluation of PVL Producing Strains in Belgaum , South India.
8. Simor AE, Ofner-Agostini M, Bryce E, Green K, McGeer A, Mulvey M, et al. (2001) The evolution of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Canadian hospitals: 5 years of national surveillance. Cmaj.165(1):21-6.