ABSTRACT
AIM: We aimed to assess the resistance rates of antimicrobial-resistant, in bacterial pathogens of epidemiological importance in 47 Mexican centers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we included a stratified sample of 47 centers, covering 20 Mexican states. Selected isolates considered as potential causatives of disease collected over a 6-month period were included. Laboratories employed their usual methods to perform microbiological studies. The results were deposited into a database and analyzed with the WHONET 5.6 software. RESULTS: In this 6-month study, a total of 22,943 strains were included. Regarding Gram-negatives, carbapenem resistance was detected in ≤ 3% in Escherichia coli, 12.5% in Klebsiella sp. and Enterobacter sp., and up to 40% in Pseudomonas aeruginosa; in the latter, the resistance rate for piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP) was as high as 19.1%. In Acinetobacter sp., resistance rates for cefepime, ciprofloxacin, meropenem, and TZP were higher than 50%. Regarding Gram-positives, methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was as high as 21.4%, and vancomycin (VAN) resistance reached up to 21% in Enterococcus faecium. Acinetobacter sp. presented the highest multidrug resistance (53%) followed by Klebsiella sp. (22.6%) and E. coli (19.4%). CONCLUSION: The multidrug resistance of Acinetobacter sp., Klebsiella sp. and E. coli and the carbapenem resistance in specific groups of enterobacteria deserve special attention in Mexico. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and MRSA are common in our hospitals. Our results present valuable information for the implementation of measures to control drug resistance.
Subject(s)
Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Gram-Negative Bacteria/drug effects , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/epidemiology , Acinetobacter/drug effects , Escherichia coli/drug effects , Female , Gram-Negative Bacteria/classification , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Humans , Klebsiella/drug effects , Male , Mexico/epidemiology , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , SoftwareABSTRACT
Numerous reports suggest more recurrences and a worse prognosis after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) than after open cholecystectomy (OC). The objective of this study was to compare the survival rate of patients undergoing a laparoscopic procedure versus those undergoing an open operation. A series of 24 patients with gallbladder cancer detected after LC were compared with 40 consecutive patients with gallbladder cancer detected after OC. Patients were matched by wall invasion, age, and whether they underwent a reoperation or only cholecystectomy. The series included 2 patients with in situ tumors, 2 with mucosal tumors, 1 with muscular invasion, 13 with subserosal invasion, and 6 with serosal invasion. Recurrences were observed in 4 of the 10 patients with subserosal compromise who underwent reoperation. In contrast, in the OC group of 26 patients with subserosal invasion, 20 of whom were reoperated, only 2 had a recurrence. Of the six patients with serosal infiltration, three in the LC underwent reoperation, all of whom had recurrences that precluded resection. Of the 12 patients in the OC group who presented with serosal invasion, 6 were reoperated and 4 had a recurrence. Overall survival curves did not show differences when patients were compared according to the type of procedure performed. Similarly, the analysis of patients according to the level of wall invasion indicated that there was no significant difference in survival. Although multiple reports have shown a worse prognosis for patients with gallbladder cancer undergoing LC, this study did not show a significant survival difference between the two methods. Although there is a higher but insignificant recurrence rate among the patients who underwent LC, this is not translated into survival.