The difference between charateristic of septic patients caused by Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae

  • Trịnh Văn Sơn
  • Nguyễn Đăng Mạnh
  • Lê Hữu Song

Main Article Content

Keywords

Sepsis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the difference between clinical, subclinical manifestation of septic patients caused by E. coli and K. pneumoniae. Subject and method: In total, 165 septic patients caused by E. coli (115 patients) and K. pneumoniae (50 patients) at 108 Military Central Hospital from October 2014 to May 2016 were enrolled in this study. Blood culture were performed at the Microbiology Department of 108 Military Central Hospital with routinely protocol. Result: Sepsis was frequent appeared in patients with pre-condition (88.9%). E. coli sepsis was common associated with cancer (30.4%), hypertension (28.7%) and diabetes (17.4%), while K. pneumoniae sepsis was 16.0%, 22.0% and 20.0%, respectively. The most of sepsic patients presented primary source infections (85.3%). The most of primary source of sepsis caused by E. coli were urinary tract infection (34.8%), biliary tract infection (31.3%); while related intervention (26.0%), respiratory infection (24.0%) and biliary tract infection (18.0%) were the most common primary source of sepsis caused by K. pneumoniae. Length of stay in hospital of K. pneumoniae sepsis was significant longer than E. coli sepsis (27.7 ± 27.6 vs 19.9 ± 14.7 days, p=0.02). Ratio of shock, mortality, inflammatory markers and SOFA scores were not significant difference between septic patients caused by E. coli and K. pneumoniae. Conclusion:  The primary source of infections was difference between sepsis caused by E. coli and K. pneumoniae; septic patients caused by K. pneumoniae seems to be more severe compared to septic patients caused by E. coli.


Keywords: Sepsis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae.   

Article Details

References

Tài liệu tham khảo
1. Phạm Thị Ngọc Thảo (2013) Giá trị tiên lượng của các cytokine TNF-α, IL-6, IL-10 ở bệnh nhân nhiễm khuẩn huyết nặng. Tạp chí Y học TP. Hồ Chí Minh. Tập 17 (Phụ bản số 2), tr. 7-14.
2. Tumbarello M et al (2006) Bloodstream infections caused by extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae: Risk factors, molecular epidemiology, and clinical outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50(2): 498-504.
3. Brun-Buisson C et al (1995) Incidence, risk factors, and outcome of severe sepsis and septic shock in adults. A multicenter prospective study in intensive care units. French ICU Group for Severe Sepsis. JAMA 274(12): 968-674.
4. Dagher Gilbert Abou et al (2015) Descriptive analysis of sepsis in a developing country. International journal of emergency medicine 8: 19.
5. Vu Quoc Dat et al (2017) Bacterial bloodstream infections in a tertiary infectious diseases hospital in Northern Vietnam: Aetiology, drug resistance, and treatment outcome. BMC infectious diseases 17(1): 493.
6. Dellinger RP et al (2013) Surviving sepsis campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med 41(2): 580-637.
7. Mayr FB, Yende S and Angus DC (2014) Epidemiology of severe sepsis. Virulence 5(1): 4-11.
8. Park, Dae Won et al (2012) Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of community-acquired severe sepsis and septic shock: A prospective observational study in 12 university hospitals in Korea. Journal of Korean medical science 27(11): 1308-1314.
9. Southeast Asia Infectious Disease Clinical Research, Network (2017) Causes and outcomes of sepsis in southeast Asia: A multinational multicentre cross-sectional study. The Lancet. Global health 5(2): 157-167.
10. Trung NT et al (2019) PCR-based Sepsis@Quick test is superior in comparison with blood culture for identification of sepsis-causative pathogens. Sci Rep 9(1): 13663.
11. Vincent JL et al (2009) International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA 302(21): 2323-2329.
12. Zhang Q et al (2019) Clinical outcome of Escherichia coli bloodstream infection in cancer patients with/without biofilm formation: A single-center retrospective study. Infect Drug Resist 12: 359-371.