Hacek D M, Bednarz P, Noskin G A, Zembower T, Peterson L R
Department of Pathology, Clinical Microbiology Division, Northwestern Memorial Hospital and Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Mar;39(3):1152-4. doi: 10.1128/JCM.39.3.1152-1154.2001.
It has been suggested that a method of performing surveillance for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) is to screen specimens submitted for Clostridium difficile testing. We compared this approach to our focused surveillance program of high-risk units during October 1997 to compare the yield of VRE and multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (MDRE) with both methods. Of the stools submitted for C. difficile testing, 14% were positive for VRE or MDRE, whereas rectal swabs from routine surveillance yielded 11% VRE- or MDRE-positive results. Although stools submitted for C. difficile testing resulted in a higher percentage of positive cultures, 14 VRE- and 2 MDRE-positive patients from our high-risk population were missed because many patients had no stool submitted for C. difficile testing. Therefore, while screening stools submitted for C. difficile testing cannot replace our focused surveillance program, it appears advantageous to assess these stools at various intervals to detect new patient reservoirs of drug-resistant organisms that may benefit from routine surveillance cultures.
有人提出,一种对耐万古霉素肠球菌(VRE)进行监测的方法是对提交进行艰难梭菌检测的标本进行筛查。我们在1997年10月将这种方法与我们针对高危病房的重点监测计划进行了比较,以比较两种方法检测VRE和多重耐药肠杆菌科(MDRE)的阳性率。在提交进行艰难梭菌检测的粪便中,14%对VRE或MDRE呈阳性,而常规监测的直肠拭子中VRE或MDRE阳性结果的比例为11%。尽管提交进行艰难梭菌检测的粪便培养阳性率更高,但我们高危人群中有14例VRE阳性患者和2例MDRE阳性患者被漏检,因为许多患者没有提交粪便进行艰难梭菌检测。因此,虽然筛查提交进行艰难梭菌检测的粪便不能取代我们的重点监测计划,但定期评估这些粪便以检测可能受益于常规监测培养的耐药菌新患者来源似乎是有利的。