• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[糖尿病足骨髓炎的病原菌分布及骨髓炎的危险因素]

[Distribution of pathogens in diabetic foot osteomyelitis and risk factors of osteomyelitis].

作者信息

Huang Ying, Cao Ying, Zou Mengchen, Li Wenxia, Luo Xiangrong, Jiang Ya, Xue Yaoming, Gao Fang

机构信息

Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China. E-mail:

出版信息

Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2015 Dec;35(12):1782-6.

PMID:26714916
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To explore the distribution and antibiotic resistance of pathogens in lesions of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) and analyze the risk factors causing osteomyelitis.

METHODS

A total of 372 patients with diabetic foot infections hospitalized between January 2011 and December 2014, including 203 with osteomyelitis (OM group) and 169 without osteomyelitis (non-OM group), were examined for the distribution and antibiotic resistance profile of the pathogens in the wounds. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors causing osteomyelitis.

RESULTS

Gram-negative bacteria were the predominant pathogens (53.7%) in the infected wounds in OM group, whereas Gram-positive bacteria were the most frequently found (56.7%) in non-OM group (P=0.001). Among the Gram-positive bacteria, Staphylococcus was the dominating flora (35.1%). The resistance rate to oxacillin and cefoxitin of the isolated bacteria in OM group (64.9% and 68.5%, respectively) was significantly higher than that in non-OM group (29.2% and 32.6%, respectively; P<0.05). Among the gram-negative bacteria, Enterobacteriaceae was the dominating flora (62.4%), with a higher resistance rate to Cefepime and Aztreonam in OM group (30.1% and 38.6%, respectively) than in non-OM group (15.1% and 22.2%, respectively; P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis indicated that the infection by multi-drug resistant bacteria and an wounds area >4 cm(2) were the risk factors for osteomyelitis in patients with diabetic foot infections (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

In addition to an empirical anti-infection therapy, clinicians should choose specific antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria according to the microbial spectrum and antibiotic resistance of pathogens in patients with DFO; patients with diabetic foot infections by multi-drug resistant bacteria and those with a wound area exceeding 4 cm(2) are exposed to an increased risk of osteomyelitis.

摘要

目的

探讨糖尿病足骨髓炎(DFO)病灶中病原菌的分布及耐药情况,并分析导致骨髓炎的危险因素。

方法

对2011年1月至2014年12月期间住院的372例糖尿病足感染患者进行研究,其中203例患有骨髓炎(OM组),169例未患骨髓炎(非OM组),检测伤口病原菌的分布及耐药情况。采用Logistic回归分析导致骨髓炎的危险因素。

结果

OM组感染伤口中革兰阴性菌为主要病原菌(53.7%),而非OM组中革兰阳性菌最为常见(56.7%)(P = 0.001)。在革兰阳性菌中,葡萄球菌是主要菌群(35.1%)。OM组分离菌对苯唑西林和头孢西丁的耐药率(分别为64.9%和68.5%)显著高于非OM组(分别为29.2%和32.6%;P < 0.05)。在革兰阴性菌中,肠杆菌科是主要菌群(62.4%),OM组对头孢吡肟和氨曲南的耐药率(分别为30.1%和38.6%)高于非OM组(分别为15.1%和22.2%;P < 0.05)。Logistic回归分析表明,多重耐药菌感染和伤口面积>4 cm²是糖尿病足感染患者发生骨髓炎的危险因素(P < 0.05)。

结论

除经验性抗感染治疗外,临床医生应根据DFO患者病原菌的菌谱和耐药情况选择针对革兰阴性菌的特异性抗生素;多重耐药菌感染的糖尿病足患者及伤口面积超过4 cm²的患者发生骨髓炎的风险增加。

相似文献

1
[Distribution of pathogens in diabetic foot osteomyelitis and risk factors of osteomyelitis].[糖尿病足骨髓炎的病原菌分布及骨髓炎的危险因素]
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2015 Dec;35(12):1782-6.
2
Risk factors for infection of the diabetic foot with multi-antibiotic resistant microorganisms.糖尿病足感染多重耐药微生物的危险因素。
J Infect. 2007 May;54(5):439-45. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2006.08.013. Epub 2006 Oct 2.
3
[Clinical distribution and antimicrobial resistance analysis of 754 pathogenic bacteria in diabetic foot infection].754株糖尿病足感染病原菌的临床分布及耐药性分析
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2014 Apr 1;94(12):889-94.
4
Clinico-microbiological study and antimicrobial drug resistance profile of diabetic foot infections in North India.印度北部糖尿病足感染的临床微生物学研究及抗菌药物耐药情况
Foot (Edinb). 2011 Mar;21(1):6-14. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2010.10.003. Epub 2010 Dec 4.
5
Aerobic bacterial profile and antibiotic resistance in patients with diabetic foot infections.糖尿病足感染患者的需氧菌谱及抗生素耐药性
Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2015 Sep-Oct;48(5):546-54. doi: 10.1590/0037-8682-0146-2015.
6
Microbiological characterization of neuropathic diabetic foot infection: a retrospective study at a Portuguese tertiary hospital.神经病变性糖尿病足感染的微生物学特征:葡萄牙一家三级医院的回顾性研究。
BMC Infect Dis. 2024 Aug 6;24(1):791. doi: 10.1186/s12879-024-09677-3.
7
Causative pathogens and antibiotic resistance in diabetic foot infections: A prospective multi-center study.糖尿病足感染的致病病原体及抗生素耐药性:一项前瞻性多中心研究。
J Diabetes Complications. 2016 Jul;30(5):910-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2016.02.013. Epub 2016 Feb 21.
8
Microbiology of diabetic foot infections in a teaching hospital in Malaysia: a retrospective study of 194 cases.马来西亚一家教学医院糖尿病足感染的微生物学:194例回顾性研究
J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2007 Feb;40(1):39-44.
9
The microbiology of diabetic foot infections in patients recently treated with antibiotic therapy: A prospective study from India.近期接受抗生素治疗的糖尿病足感染患者的微生物学研究:一项来自印度的前瞻性研究。
J Diabetes Complications. 2017 Feb;31(2):407-412. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2016.11.001. Epub 2016 Nov 9.
10
[Risk factors for infections of methicillin-resistant Staphylococci in diabetic foot patients].[糖尿病足患者耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌感染的危险因素]
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2012 Jan 31;92(4):228-31.

引用本文的文献

1
[Pathogen analysis in patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis using 16S rRNA high-throughput sequencing].[运用16S rRNA高通量测序技术对糖尿病足骨髓炎患者进行病原体分析]
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2017 Nov 20;37(11):1448-1455. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4254.2017.11.04.
2
Bacterial Profile and Antibiotic Resistance in Patients with Diabetic Foot Ulcer in Guangzhou, Southern China: Focus on the Differences among Different Wagner's Grades, IDSA/IWGDF Grades, and Ulcer Types.中国南方广州糖尿病足溃疡患者的细菌谱及抗生素耐药性:聚焦不同瓦格纳分级、美国感染病学会/国际糖尿病足工作组分级和溃疡类型之间的差异
Int J Endocrinol. 2017;2017:8694903. doi: 10.1155/2017/8694903. Epub 2017 Jul 11.