Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Vet Res ; 18(1): 220, 2022 Jun 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35689258

RESUMO

Antimicrobial resistance is a complex One Health issue that exists in both human and veterinary medicine. To mitigate this ever-growing problem, efforts have been made to develop guidelines for appropriate antimicrobial use (AMU) across sectors. In veterinary medicine, there are notable literature gaps for proper AMU in minor species. We conducted a structured narrative review covering the years of July 2006 - July 2021 to find antimicrobial treatments for common bacterial infections in exotic (birds, rodents, reptiles, and others), small flock (chickens, turkeys, and other fowl), and backyard small ruminant (sheep and goats) species. We retrieved a total of 4728 articles, of which 21 articles met the criteria for our review. Studies were grouped according to species, syndrome, and body system affected. Other data extracted included the bacterial pathogen(s), treatment (active ingredient), and geographical origin. Body systems reported included: intra-oral (n = 4), gastrointestinal (n = 1), respiratory (n = 2), reproductive (n = 1), skin (n = 3), aural (n = 1), ocular (n = 4), and other/multisystem (n = 5). By species, our search resulted in: rabbit (n = 5), rat (n = 2), guinea pig (n = 1), chinchilla (n = 1), guinea pig and chinchilla (n = 1), avian species (n = 1), psittacine birds (n = 2), loris and lorikeets (n = 1), turtles (n = 2), lizards (n = 1), goats (n = 2) and sheep (n = 2). The results of our findings identified a distinct gap in consistent antimicrobial treatment information for commonly encountered bacterial conditions within these species. There is a persisting need for clinical trials that focus on antibacterial treatment to strengthen the evidence base for AMU within exotic, small flock, and backyard small ruminant species.


Assuntos
Anti-Infecciosos , Infecções Bacterianas , Doenças das Cabras , Doenças das Aves Domésticas , Doenças dos Roedores , Doenças dos Ovinos , Animais , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Bacterianas/veterinária , Galinhas , Doenças das Cabras/tratamento farmacológico , Cabras , Cobaias , Doenças das Aves Domésticas/microbiologia , Coelhos , Ratos , Ovinos , Doenças dos Ovinos/tratamento farmacológico
2.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 45, 2022 03 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35255988

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia from SARS-CoV-2 is difficult to distinguish from other viral and bacterial etiologies. Broad-spectrum antimicrobials are frequently prescribed to patients hospitalized with COVID-19 which potentially acts as a catalyst for the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis during the first 18 months of the pandemic to quantify the prevalence and types of resistant co-infecting organisms in patients with COVID-19 and explore differences across hospital and geographic settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (BioSIS), and Scopus from November 1, 2019 to May 28, 2021 to identify relevant articles pertaining to resistant co-infections in patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Patient- and study-level analyses were conducted. We calculated pooled prevalence estimates of co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms using random effects models. Stratified meta-analysis by hospital and geographic setting was also performed to elucidate any differences. RESULTS: Of 1331 articles identified, 38 met inclusion criteria. A total of 1959 unique isolates were identified with 29% (569) resistant organisms identified. Co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms ranged from 0.2 to 100% among included studies. Pooled prevalence of co-infection with resistant bacterial and fungal organisms was 24% (95% CI 8-40%; n = 25 studies: I2 = 99%) and 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-0.6%; n = 8 studies: I2 = 78%), respectively. Among multi-drug resistant organisms, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and multi-drug resistant Candida auris were most commonly reported. Stratified analyses found higher proportions of AMR outside of Europe and in ICU settings, though these results were not statistically significant. Patient-level analysis demonstrated > 50% (n = 58) mortality, whereby all but 6 patients were infected with a resistant organism. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 18 months of the pandemic, AMR prevalence was high in COVID-19 patients and varied by hospital and geography although there was substantial heterogeneity. Given the variation in patient populations within these studies, clinical settings, practice patterns, and definitions of AMR, further research is warranted to quantify AMR in COVID-19 patients to improve surveillance programs, infection prevention and control practices and antimicrobial stewardship programs globally.


Assuntos
Bactérias/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , COVID-19/complicações , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana , Farmacorresistência Fúngica , Micoses/tratamento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Antifúngicos/farmacologia , Bactérias/classificação , Bactérias/genética , Bactérias/isolamento & purificação , Infecções Bacterianas/etiologia , Infecções Bacterianas/microbiologia , COVID-19/virologia , Fungos/classificação , Fungos/efeitos dos fármacos , Fungos/genética , Fungos/isolamento & purificação , Humanos , Micoses/etiologia , Micoses/microbiologia , SARS-CoV-2/fisiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA