medigraphic.com

2021, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Revista Cubana de Angiología y Cirugía Vascular 2021; 22 (1)

Bacterial germs frequently isolated in phlebostatic ulcers of admitted patients

Sánchez RL, Pérez LD, Álvarez LA, Chirino DL, Rodríguez VLE

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 1-16
PDF size: 557.94 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Phlebostatic ulcers are an important pathology in daily medical practice at all levels of care; after pain and edema, lower limb ulcers are the third most common problem in angiology consultations.
Objective: Characterize frequently isolated bacterial germs in the phlebostatic ulcers of admitted patients.
Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective study was conducted in 60 patients admitted due to a diagnosis of phlebostatic ulcers from July 2016 to June 2017. It was made a microbiological cultivation of the lesion with the respective antibiogram to all the patients. Variables were taken into account, like: type of phlebostatic ulcer, isolated bacterial germs, antibiotics tested in vitro and antibiotic sensitivity pattern. The absolute and relative frequencies were calculated.
Results: A predominance of varicose ulcers (67%) was found. The most isolated bacterial germ was Pseudomasspp. (41.7%), and it was more often in varicose ulcers than in post-thrombotic ulcers (47.5% vs. 30%). The best percentages of in vitro sensitivity were shown against the following antibiotics: Clindamycin (100%), Tobramycin (79.2%), Ciprofloxacin (78.4%), Amikacin (68.4%), Cotrimoxazol (68.2%), Cefepime (67.6%), Doxycycline (66.7%), Chloramphenicol (60%), Meropenem (62.1%), Penicillin G (57%), Aztreonam (55.9%).
Conclusions: Pseudomasspp. was the most isolated bacterial germ in patients with varicose and post-thrombotic ulcers; in addition, sensitivity was present in 11 of the 23 antibiotics that were tested in vitro in more than 50% of the isolates they faced.


REFERENCES

  1. Otero G, Agorio C, Martínez M. Úlceras de miembros inferiores. Características clínico-epidemiológicas de los pacientes asistidos en la Unidad de Heridas Crónicas del Hospital de Clínicas. Rev Méd Urug. 2012 [acceso 05/06/2019];28(3):182-9. Disponible en: http://www.rmu.org.uy/revista/2012v3/art4.pdf

  2. Terrie YC. Recognizing and treating venous stasis ulcers. US Pharmacist. 2017 [acceso 05/06/2019];42(2):36-9. Disponible en: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/881470?nlid=116540_2381&src=WNL_mdplsfeat_170718_mscpedit_surg&uac=121243HY&spon=14&impID=1391824&faf=1

  3. Laloum EG, Senet P. Úlceras de la pierna. EMC-Tratado de Medicina. 2015;19(2):1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1636-5410(15)70943-8

  4. Abbad CM, Rial R, Ballesteros MD, García C.Fisopatología y epidemiología. Guías de práctica clínica en enfermedad venosa crónica. id-medica. Torrejón de Ardoz. 2015 [acceso 30/05/2019]:6-7 Disponible en: https://www.mision-compresion.es/upload/publicaciones/PDF2_Guias-Practica-Clinica-Enfermedad-Venosa-Cronica_431.pdf

  5. Chaby G. Úlceras de la pierna de origen venoso o mixto de predominio venoso. EMC-Podología. 2015;17(3):1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1762-827X(15)72464-8

  6. Lopes MM, Silva DA, Santos JC, Nogueira R, Sousa G, Oliveira A, et al. Úlcera venosa: seis años de existencia por 92 días de cicatrización. Gerokomos. 2016 Sep [acceso 30/05/2019];27(3):131-3. Disponible en: http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1134-928X2016000300010&lng=es

  7. Sopena Apola P, Bermejo Dorado F. Úlceras vasculares. Ulceras.net. [acceso 30/05/2019]. Disponible en: http://www.ulceras.net/monografico/103/91/ulceras-vasculares-venosas.html

  8. Reyes-Becerril CL, Santiago-Arreort C. Cultivo en las úlceras del pie diabético infectado. Rev San Mili. 2018 [acceso 30/05/2019];54(1):35-8. Disponible en: http://www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/sanmil/sm-2000/sm001g.pdf

  9. Balbuena JO, Madero RG, Gómez TS, Caballero MC, Romero IS, Martínez AR. Microbiología de las infecciones de úlceras por presión y de origen vascular. Rev Esp Ger Gerontol. 2015;50(1):5-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regg.2014.08.001

  10. Fleitas AS. Terapia antimicrobiana utilizada de forma empírica y prudente en los pacientes con enfermedades vasculares periféricas. Rev Cubana Angiol Cir Vasc. 2015 Dic [acceso 05/6/2019];16(2):190-204. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1682-00372015000200007&lng=es

  11. Tuttle MS. Association between microbial bio-burden and healing outcomes in venous leg ulcers: a review of the evidence. Adv Wound Care. 2015;4(1):1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2014.0535

  12. Ochoa LF, del Pilar SM, Hurtado DC. Cuidado del paciente con úlcera venosa. Estándar operacional. Rev Actual Enferm. 2014 [acceso 06/06/2019];17(1). Disponible en: https://encolombia.com/medicina/revistas-medicas/enfermeria/ve-171/ulcera-venosa/

  13. Barrios Osuna Irene, Anido Escobar Vivianne, Morera Pérez Maricela. Declaración de Helsinki: cambios y exégesis. Rev Cubana Salud Pública. 2016 Mar [acceso 05/02/2021];42(1). Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S086434662016000100014&lng=es.

  14. Pugliese DJ. Infection in venous leg ulcers: considerations for optimal management in the elderly. Drugs & Aging. 2016;33(2):87-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-016-0343-8

  15. Dos Santos SD, Martins MA, do Prado MA, Soriano JV, Bachion MM. Are there clinical signs and symptoms of infection to indicate the presence of multidrug-resistant bacteria in venous ulcers? J Vasc Nurs. 2017;35(4):178-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvn.2017.08.001

  16. Bessa LJ, Fazi, P, Di Giulio M, Cellini L. Bacterial isolates from infected wounds and their antibiotic susceptibility pattern: some remarks about wound infection. Int Wound J. 2015;12(1):47-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12049

  17. Almeida GC, Dos Santos MM, Lima NG, Cidral TA, Melo MC, Lima KC. Prevalence and factors associated with wound colonization by Staphylococcus spp. and Staphylococcus aureus in hospitalized patients in inland northeastern Brazil: a cross-sectional study. BMC Infect Dis. 2014 [acceso 06/06/2019];14:(1). Disponible en: https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-14-328

  18. Serra R, Grande R, Butrico L, Rossi A, Settimio UF, CaroleoB, et al. Chronic wound infections: the role of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Exp Rev Anti-infec Ther. 2015;13(5):605-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1586/14787210.2015.1023291

  19. Ortiz J, García R, Segovia T, Cantero M, Sánchez I, Ramos A. Microbiología de las infecciones de úlceras por presión y de origen vascular. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol. 2015;50(1):5-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regg.2014.08.001

  20. Bakker K, Van Acker K, Morbach S, Perry A. Promover la educación para los cuidados del pie en países en desarrollo: el Programa Caribeño de Atención al Pie Diabético. Diabetes Voice. 2014 [acceso 06/01/2020];54(3):15-8. Disponible en: https://www.idf.org/sites/default/files/attachments/2014

  21. Georgescu M, Gheorghe I, Curutiu C, Lazar V, Bleotu C, Chifiriuc MC. Virulence and resistance features of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains isolated from chronic leg ulcers. BMC Infec Diseases. 2016;16(1):92-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-1396-3

  22. Bui UT, Edwards HE, Huygens F, Finlayson KJ. Clinical and microbial factors associated with clinically diagnosed infection in chronic leg ulcers. En: IHBI Inspires 2017. 2017 Agost 23-24 [acceso 06/01/2020]. Disponible en: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/114707/

  23. Malone M, Bjarnsho T, McBain AJ, James GA, Stoodley P, Leaper D, et al. The prevalence of bio-films in chronic wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Wound Care. 2017;26(1):20-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.1.20




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com