DOCSLIB.ORG

Gram Stain Susceptibilities Organism Identification

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

TREATMENT GUIDELINE FOR ADULT PATIENTS WITH BLOODSTREAM INFECTIONS Purpose: This guideline is intended to help guide antimicrobial therapy for patients admitted to adult service lines following the results of Gram Stain, Organism Identification (with or without Verigene molecular resistance results), and Antimicrobial Susceptibilities. Deviation from the recommendations in this guideline may be required for patients with concomitant infections, history of resistant pathogens, or with antimicrobial allergies or intolerance. The recommendations in this guideline reflect susceptibility patterns found at Michigan Medicine. How to use this guideline: For patients with ONLY Gram stain results, refer For patients with organism identification results, refer to the For patients with antimicrobial susceptibility results, refer to to the left column middle column (labeled ORGANISM IDENTIFICATION) for the right column (labeled SUSCEPTIBILITIES) for treatment (labeled GRAM STAIN) treatment recommendations recommendations for treatment recommendations GRAM STAIN ORGANISM IDENTIFICATION SUSCEPTIBILITIES S. aureus and mecA negative: Endocarditis or CNS infection: Nafcillin S. aureus or S. lugdunensis sensitive to methicillin: *Gram-positive Other infections: Cefazolin Non-CNS/endocarditis: Cefazolin cocci in clusters: CNS infection or endocarditis: Nafcillin Vancomycin S. aureus and mecA positive or mecA not Life-threatening PCN allergy: Vancomycin performed: Vancomycin S. aureus or S. lugdunensis intermediate or *Single positive resistant to methicillin: cultures from S. lugdunensis: Vancomycin Vancomycin Antimicrobial Subcommittee Approval: 12/2018 Originated: 12/2018 P&T Approval: 03/2019 Last Revised: 09/2019 Revision History: The recommendations in this guide are meant ot serve as treatment guidelines for use at Michigan Medicine facilities. If you are an individual experience a medical emergency, call 911 immediately. These guidelines should not replace a provider s profession medical advice based on clinical judgment, or be used in lieu of an Infectious Diseases consultation when necessary. As a result of ongoing research, practice guidelines may from time to time change. The authors of these guidelines have made all attempts to ensure the accuracy based on current information, however, due to ongoing research, users of these guidelines are strongly encouraged to confirm the information contained within them through and independent source. If obtained from a source other than med.umich.edu/asp, please visit the webpage for the most up-to-date document. ADULT 2 of 7 GRAM STAIN ORGANISM IDENTIFICATION SUSCEPTIBILITIES C. albicans, C. parapsilosis, C. tropicalis, C. dublinensis, and C. lusitaniae: Consider de-escalation to Fluconazole for clinically stable patients with clearance of blood cultures and fluconazole susceptibility All Candida species: Otherwise: Continue Micafungin Micafungin Yeast: Micafungin See Candidemia Guideline. Therapy should not be de- See Candidemia Guideline. Therapy should not be de- escalated until guideline criteria are met. escalated until guideline criteria are met, in conjunction Consult ID with ID consult recommendations ID consult is strongly recommended. If suspicion for Cryptococcus or If concern for urinary, ocular, endocarditis, or CNS Histoplasmosis C. glabrata with fluconazole MIC 8 (SDD): infection, alternative therapy may be needed. Consider de-escalation to Fluconazole for clinically stable (fungemia in setting Consult with ID of pneumonia or patients with clearance of blood cultures meningitis in immunocompromised Otherwise: patient), call Micafungin Infectious Diseases consult service for immediate antifungal Cryptococcus spp.: Cryptococcus spp.: recommendations Liposomal amphotericin B (Ambisome ) Fluconazole may be appropriate for step down therapy + Flucytosine when criteria is met in conjunction with ID consult recommendations Consult ID Histoplasma: Histoplasma: Liposomal amphotericin B (Ambisome ) Step down therapy may be appropriate when clinically stable in conjunction with ID consult recommendations Consult ID ADULT 3 of 7 GRAM STAIN ORGANISM IDENTIFICATION SUSCEPTIBILITIES S. aureus and mecA negative: Endocarditis or CNS infection: Oxacillin Other infections: Cefazolin S. aureus and mecA positive or mecA not performed: S. aureus or S. lugdunensis sensitive to methicillin: Vancomycin Non-CNS/endocarditis: Cefazolin CNS infection or endocarditis: Oxacillin S. lugdunensis: Life-threatening PCN allergy: Vancomycin Vancomycin S. aureus or S. lugdunensis intermediate or resistant to Consult ID methicillin: Vancomycin Consider discontinuing adjunctive gram-negative therapy between 48-72 hours if cultures are negative for gram- negative pathogens, except for patients with intra- *Gram-positive cocci abdominal infections in clusters: Vancomycin Single positive culture for Coagulase-negative Antibiotic susceptibilities are only performed when Staphylococcus or S. epidermidis in suspected infection of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus or S. epidermidis grow prosthetic material, neutropenia, or in hemodynamically from 2 or more bottles. unstable patients: If growth from 1 blood culture bottle, assess for possible S. epidermidis and mecA negative: source of infection, repeat blood cultures, and hold Cefazolin antibiotics if clinically stable S. epidermidis and mecA positive or coagulase negative Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus or S. epidermidis Staphylococcus: sensitive to methicillin: Vancomycin Non-CNS/endocarditis: Cefazolin CNS infection or endocarditis: Oxacillin For patients who do not meet the above criteria, a single Life-threatening PCN allergy: Vancomycin positive culture for coagulase-negative Staphylococcus or S. epidermidis may represent contamination, assess for Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus or S. epidermidis possible source of infection and hold antibiotics if intermediate or resistant to methicillin: clinically stable Vancomycin ADULT 4 of 7 GRAM STAIN ORGANISM IDENTIFICATION SUSCEPTIBILITIES E. faecalis and vanA/vanB Negative: Ampicillin (consider piperacillin-tazobactam as alternative for intra- abdominal infections) Life-threatening PCN allergy: Vancomycin Penicillin-based antibiotics should be first line therapy for all Enterococcus species if sensitive: E. faecalis and vanA/vanB positive: Ampicillin Ampicillin (consider ampicillin-sulbactam or piperacillin-tazobactam (consider piperacillin-tazobactam as alternative for intra- for intra-abdominal infections) abdominal infections) Life-threatening PCN allergy: Linezolid or Life-threatening PCN allergy or ampicillin-resistant Gram-positive cocci in Daptomycin for BMT patients with ANC <1,000 Enterococcus: chains or pairs: Vancomycin Vancomycin E. faecium and vanA/vanB negative: Vancomycin Patients with vancomycin allergy or ampicillin and Heme-onc, SICU, solid vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus: organ transplant: E. faecium and vanA/vanB positive: Linezolid or Linezolid Linezolid or Daptomycin for BMT patients with ANC <1,000 Daptomycin for BMT patients with ANC <1,000 BMT with ANC Patients with suspected endocarditis will likely require 1,000: E. casseliflavus, E. gallinarium: combination therapy and ID consult is strongly Linezolid Linezolid or recommended Daptomycin for BMT patients with ANC <1,000 BMT with ANC <1,000: Other Enterococcus species: Daptomycin Vancomycin S. pneumoniae, S. anginosus or Penicillin-based antibiotics should be first line therapy Streptococcus species: for all Streptococcus species infections, Non-CNS/endocarditis: Ceftriaxone if sensitive: CNS infection or endocarditis: Ceftriaxone + Vancomycin Penicillin or Ampicillin Febrile neutropenia: Vancomycin + anti-Pseudomonal beta-lactam Mild PCN allergy: Cefazolin (if no CNS infection) Mild PCN allergy CNS infection: Ceftriaxone S. agalactiae or S. pyogenes: Life-threatening PCN allergy: Vancomycin Penicillin or Ampicillin Febrile neutropenic patients should be continued on anti- Mild PCN allergy: Cefazolin (if no CNS infection) Life-threatening PCN allergy: Vancomycin Pseudomonal beta-lactam ADULT 5 of 7 GRAM STAIN ORGANISM IDENTIFICATION SUSCEPTIBILITIES E. coli, Klebsiella, or Proteus: No CTX-M, KPC, IMP, VIM, NDM, OXA detected: Cefepime or Piperacillin-tazobactam CTX-M positive: Narrow antibiotic selection based on susceptibility results, Meropenem clinical status, concomitant infections: KPC positive: Narrow-spectrum antibiotics are preferred if no *Gram-negative Meropenem-vaborbactam ± Polymyxin B* resistance or allergies. These include ampicillin, bacilli: penicillin, ampicillin-sulbactam, cefazolin, and IMP, VIM, or NDM positive: Piperacillin- cefuroxime. Ceftazidime-avibactam + Aztreonam + Polymyxin B* tazobactam ID consult is strongly encouraged for patients with or infections from organisms with KPC, IMP, VIM, NDM, OXA positive: or OXA resistance genes Cefepime Ceftazidime-avibactam (add metronidazole for intra-abdominal *substitute Tobramycin for Polymyxin B when treating infections) Proteus *Evaluate if patient Enterobacter, Serratia, Morganella, or Citrobacter: Narrow antibiotic selection based on susceptibility results, has history of No CTX-M, KPC, IMP, VIM, NDM, OXA detected: clinical status, concomitant infections: resistance to Cefepime piperacillin- ID consult is strongly encouraged for patients with tazobactam or CTX-M positive: infections from organisms with KPC, IMP, VIM, NDM, cefepime with prior Meropenem or OXA resistance genes year and modify KPC positive: therapy accordingly Enterobacter, Serratia and Citrobacter
Recommended publications
  • Ceftazidime for Injection) PHARMACY BULK PACKAGE – NOT for DIRECT INFUSION

    Ceftazidime for Injection) PHARMACY BULK PACKAGE – NOT for DIRECT INFUSION

    PRESCRIBING INFORMATION FORTAZ® (ceftazidime for injection) PHARMACY BULK PACKAGE – NOT FOR DIRECT INFUSION To reduce the development of drug-resistant bacteria and maintain the effectiveness of FORTAZ and other antibacterial drugs, FORTAZ should be used only to treat or prevent infections that are proven or strongly suspected to be caused by bacteria. DESCRIPTION Ceftazidime is a semisynthetic, broad-spectrum, beta-lactam antibacterial drug for parenteral administration. It is the pentahydrate of pyridinium, 1-[[7-[[(2-amino-4­ thiazolyl)[(1-carboxy-1-methylethoxy)imino]acetyl]amino]-2-carboxy-8-oxo-5-thia-1­ azabicyclo[4.2.0]oct-2-en-3-yl]methyl]-, hydroxide, inner salt, [6R-[6α,7β(Z)]]. It has the following structure: The molecular formula is C22H32N6O12S2, representing a molecular weight of 636.6. FORTAZ is a sterile, dry-powdered mixture of ceftazidime pentahydrate and sodium carbonate. The sodium carbonate at a concentration of 118 mg/g of ceftazidime activity has been admixed to facilitate dissolution. The total sodium content of the mixture is approximately 54 mg (2.3 mEq)/g of ceftazidime activity. The Pharmacy Bulk Package vial contains 709 mg of sodium carbonate. The sodium content is approximately 54 mg (2.3mEq) per gram of ceftazidime. FORTAZ in sterile crystalline form is supplied in Pharmacy Bulk Packages equivalent to 6g of anhydrous ceftazidime. The Pharmacy Bulk Package bottle is a container of sterile preparation for parenteral use that contains many single doses. The contents are intended for use in a pharmacy admixture program and are restricted to the preparation of admixtures for intravenous use. THE PHARMACY BULK PACKAGE IS NOT FOR DIRECT INFUSION, FURTHER DILUTION IS REQUIRED BEFORE USE.
  • Cefoxitin Versus Piperacillin– Tazobactam As Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy: Protocol for a Randomised Controlled Trial

    Cefoxitin Versus Piperacillin– Tazobactam As Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy: Protocol for a Randomised Controlled Trial

    Open access Protocol BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048398 on 4 March 2021. Downloaded from Cefoxitin versus piperacillin– tazobactam as surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy: protocol for a randomised controlled trial Nicole M Nevarez ,1 Brian C Brajcich,2 Jason Liu,2,3 Ryan Ellis,2 Clifford Y Ko,2 Henry A Pitt,4 Michael I D'Angelica,5 Adam C Yopp1 To cite: Nevarez NM, ABSTRACT Strengths and limitations of this study Brajcich BC, Liu J, et al. Introduction Although antibiotic prophylaxis is Cefoxitin versus piperacillin– established in reducing postoperative surgical site tazobactam as surgical ► A major strength of this study is the multi- infections (SSIs), the optimal antibiotic for prophylaxis in antibiotic prophylaxis institutional, double- arm, randomised controlled in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) remains unclear. The study trial design. objective is to evaluate if administration of piperacillin– pancreatoduodenectomy: ► A limitation of this study is that all perioperative care protocol for a randomised tazobactam as antibiotic prophylaxis results in decreased is at the discretion of the operating surgeon and is controlled trial. BMJ Open 30- day SSI rate compared with cefoxitin in patients not standardised. 2021;11:e048398. doi:10.1136/ undergoing elective PD. ► All data will be collected through the American bmjopen-2020-048398 Methods and analysis This study will be a multi- College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality ► Prepublication history for institution, double- arm, non- blinded randomised controlled Improvement Program, which is a strength for its this paper is available online. superiority trial. Adults ≥18 years consented to undergo PD ease of use but a limitation due to the variety of data To view these files, please visit for all indications who present to institutions participating included.
  • Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Children: Review of Current Knowledge and Its Application

    Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Children: Review of Current Knowledge and Its Application

    Infect Dis Ther (2017) 6:57–67 DOI 10.1007/s40121-016-0144-8 REVIEW Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Children: Review of Current Knowledge and its Application Juwon Yim . Leah M. Molloy . Jason G. Newland Received: November 10, 2016 / Published online: December 30, 2016 Ó The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com ABSTRACT infections, CABP caused by penicillin- and ceftriaxone-resistant S. pneumoniae and Ceftaroline is a novel cephalosporin recently resistant Gram-positive infections that fail approved in children for treatment of acute first-line antimicrobial agents. However, bacterial skin and soft tissue infections and limited data are available on tolerability in community-acquired bacterial pneumonia neonates and infants younger than 2 months (CABP) caused by methicillin-resistant of age, and on pharmacokinetic characteristics Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae in children with chronic medical conditions and other susceptible bacteria. With a favorable and those with invasive, complicated tolerability profile and efficacy proven in infections. In this review, the microbiological pediatric patients and excellent in vitro profile of ceftaroline, its mechanism of action, activity against resistant Gram-positive and and pharmacokinetic profile will be presented. Gram-negative bacteria, ceftaroline may serve Additionally, clinical evidence for use in as a therapeutic option for polymicrobial pediatric patients and proposed place in therapy is discussed. Enhanced content To view enhanced content for this article go to http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/ 1F47F0601BB3F2DD. Keywords: Antibiotic resistance; Ceftaroline J. Yim (&) fosamil; Children; Methicillin-resistant St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, Staphylococcus aureus; Streptococcus pneumoniae USA e-mail: [email protected] L.
  • Gst Gram Staining Learning Objectives the Student Will  Use Aseptic Techniques in the Safe Inoculation of Various Forms of Media

    Gst Gram Staining Learning Objectives the Student Will  Use Aseptic Techniques in the Safe Inoculation of Various Forms of Media

    GSt Gram Staining Learning Objectives The student will Use aseptic techniques in the safe inoculation of various forms of media. Follow oral and written instructions and manage time in the lab efficiently. Use the bright field light microscope to view microbes under oil immersion, make accurate observations and appropriate interpretations and store the microscope according to lab procedures. Properly prepare a bacterial smear for accurate staining and describe the chemical basis for simple staining and negative staining. Background/Theory Differential staining distinguishes organisms based on their interactions with multiple stains. In other words, two organisms may appear to be different colors. Differential staining techniques commonly used in clinical settings include Gram staining, acid-fast staining, endospore staining, flagella staining, and capsule staining. This link to the OpenStax Microbiology text provides more detail on these differential staining techniques. (OpenStax CNX, 2018) The Gram stain is a differential staining procedure that involves multiple steps. It was developed by Danish microbiologist Hans Christian Gram in 1884 as an effective method to distinguish between bacteria containing the two most common types of cell walls. (OpenStax CNX, 2018) One type consists of an inner plasma membrane and a thick outer layer of peptidoglycan. The other type consists of a double phospholipid Figure 1 Simplified structures of Gram negative cells (left) and Gram positive bilayer with a thin layer of cells (right) peptidoglycan between the two. The Gram Staining technique remains one of the most frequently used staining techniques. The steps of the Gram stain procedure are listed below and illustrated in Figure. (OpenStax CNX, 2018) 1.
  • Charm II Antibiotic Analysis—Grain

    Charm II Antibiotic Analysis—Grain

    Charm ii Antibiotic Analysis for Grain Products PROCeDURAL FLOWCHART + Binding Tracer Reagent Tablet Tablet Sample Charm ii 7600 analyzer Incubate START STOP Centrifuge Families DeteCteD = Aminoglycosides = Amphenicols/Chloramphenicol Resuspend = Beta-lactams = Macrolides = Sulfonamides C2Soft = Tetracyclines (optional) Count Results SAMPLE SIZe 50 to 100 g Computer Report SAMPLE PREPARATION Homogenize product in extraction solution for 60 seconds. Filter or centrifuge for 3 minutes. sample printout Test supernatant. Date = 08/23/10 preparation time Approximately 10-15 minutes, Time = 14:28:12 depending on the number of Operator = 1 samples. Time Counted = 60 Sample I.D. = 7764 ASSAY TIME Approximately 10 minutes, depending on drug family. Assay = Chloramphenicol CAPACITY 6 to 12 samples in assay, Lot# = ATBL 014 depending on drug family. Control Point = 2564 Sample (CPM) = 3676 Interpretation = Not Found Charm sciences, inc. 659 Andover Street, Lawrence, MA 01843, USA | Tel: +1.978.687.9200 | www.charm.com Charm ii Antibiotic Analysis for Grain Products Charm ii Kit Drug test sensitivity 1 (ppb) aminoglycosides (STIIHG) Streptomycin 2000 Dihydrostreptomycin 7500 Gentamicin 5000 aminoglycosides (GIIHG) Gentamicin 1000 Neomycin 500 Beta-lactams (PIIG) Penicillin-G 200 Amoxicillin 450 Ampicillin 400 Cephapirin 200 Ceftiofur 500 Cloxacillin 2500 Oxacillin 3750 Dicloxacillin 2500 Cefazolin 1500 Cefodroxil 1500 Cefotaxime 400 Cephalexin 1500 Cephradine 1500 Cefquinome 1000 Hetacillin 400 Nafcillin 3000 Penethamate 200 Piperacillin 1000 Ticarcillin 3500 Chloramphenicol Chloramphenicol 40 Florfenicol 160 & other amphenicols (CIIHG) Thiamphenicol 200 Chloramphenicol (AIIHG) Chloramphenicol 5 macrolides (EIIG) Erythromycin 1000 Tylosin 1000 Spiramycin 1000 Pirlimycin 2000 Tilmicosin 1000 Lincomycin 2500 sulfonamides (SMIIHG) Sulfamethazine 500 Sulfadimethoxine 200 Sulfathiazole 400 Sulfadiazine 200 tetracyclines (TIIHG) Tetracycline 100 Chlortetracycline 800 Oxytetracycline 800 1 Exceed 90% positive at a 95% confidence limit Charm sciences, inc.
  • Activity of Cefepime-Zidebactam Against Multidrug-Resistant (MDR) Gram-Negative Pathogens

    Activity of Cefepime-Zidebactam Against Multidrug-Resistant (MDR) Gram-Negative Pathogens

    antibiotics Article Activity of Cefepime-Zidebactam against Multidrug-Resistant (MDR) Gram-Negative Pathogens Kenneth S. Thomson 1,* , Sameh AbdelGhani 1,2, James W. Snyder 1 and Gina K. Thomson 1,3 1 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA; [email protected] (S.A.); [email protected] (J.W.S.); [email protected] (G.K.T.) 2 Faculty of Pharmacy, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef 62511, Egypt 3 Microbiology Department, University of Louisville Hospital, Louisville, KY 40202, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 18 February 2019; Accepted: 19 March 2019; Published: 23 March 2019 Abstract: This study compared the activity of cefepime + zidebactam (FEP-ZID) and selected currently available antibacterial agents against a panel of multidrug-resistant (MDR) clinical isolates chosen to provide an extreme challenge for antibacterial activity. FEP–ZID had a very broad and potent in vitro spectrum of activity, and was highly active against many MDR isolates of Enterobacterales, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii. Notably, it inhibited isolates producing carbapenemases of Ambler classes A, B, and D, and P. aeruginosa isolates with multiple resistance mechanisms including combinations of upregulated efflux, diminished or non-functional OprD porins, and AmpC overproduction. Its clinical role will be determined initially by the breakpoints assigned to it, comparison studies with other investigational β-lactamase inhibitor combinations, and ultimately by the developing body of therapeutic outcome data. Keywords: carbapenemase-producing organism; carbapenemase; zidebactam; therapy 1. Introduction Gram-negative multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens, particularly carbapenemase-producing organisms (CPOs), cause infections of high mortality that are typically treated with antibiotic combinations that include toxic drugs such as polymyxins and aminoglycosides [1].
  • Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Antibiotic Guide

    Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Antibiotic Guide

    Stanford Health Issue Date: 05/2017 Stanford Antimicrobial Safety and Sustainability Program Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Antibiotic Guide Table 1: Antibiotic selection options for healthcare associated and/or immunocompromised patients • Healthcare associated: intravenous therapy, wound care, or intravenous chemotherapy within the prior 30 days, residence in a nursing home or other long-term care facility, hospitalization in an acute care hospital for two or more days within the prior 90 days, attendance at a hospital or hemodialysis clinic within the prior 30 days • Immunocompromised: Receiving chemotherapy, known systemic cancer not in remission, ANC <500, severe cell-mediated immune deficiency Table 2: Antibiotic selection options for community acquired, immunocompetent patients Table 3: Antibiotic selection options for patients with simple sepsis, community acquired, immunocompetent patients requiring hospitalization. Risk Factors for Select Organisms P. aeruginosa MRSA Invasive Candidiasis VRE (and other resistant GNR) Community acquired: • Known colonization with MDROs • Central venous catheter • Liver transplant • Prior IV antibiotics within 90 day • Recent MRSA infection • Broad-spectrum antibiotics • Known colonization • Known colonization with MDROs • Known MRSA colonization • + 1 of the following risk factors: • Prolonged broad antibacterial • Skin & Skin Structure and/or IV access site: ♦ Parenteral nutrition therapy Hospital acquired: ♦ Purulence ♦ Dialysis • Prolonged profound • Prior IV antibiotics within 90 days ♦ Abscess
  • Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis

    Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis

    Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis The antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis protocol establishes evidence-based standards for surgical prophylaxis at The Nebraska Medical Center. The protocol was adapted from the recently published consensus guidelines from the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), and the Surgical Infection Society (SIS) and customized to Nebraska Medicine with the input of the Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in concert with the various surgical groups at the institution. The protocol established here-in will be implemented via standard order sets utilized within One Chart. Routine surgical prophylaxis and current and future surgical order sets are expected to conform to this guidance. Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis Initiation Optimal timing: Within 60 minutes before surgical incision o Exceptions: Fluoroquinolones and vancomycin (within 120 minutes before surgical incision) Successful prophylaxis necessitates that the antimicrobial agent achieve serum and tissue concentrations above the MIC for probable organisms associated with the specific procedure type at the time of incision as well as for the duration of the procedure. Renal Dose Adjustment Guidance The following table can be utilized to determine if adjustments are needed to antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis for both pre-op and post-op dosing. Table 1 Renal Dosage Adjustment Dosing Regimen with Dosing Regimen with CrCl Dosing Regimen with
  • Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Infections in County Jails

    Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Infections in County Jails

    Prevention, Treatment, and Containment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections in County Jails Texas Department of State Health Services and Correctional Facilities Workgroup September 2006 2 Clinical guidelines are being made available to the public for informational purposes only. Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) does not warrant these guidelines for any other purpose and assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage resulting from the reliance thereof. Proper medical practice necessitates that all cases are evaluated on an individual basis and that treatment decisions are patient-specific. 3 We acknowledge the Federal Bureau of Prisons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management Of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Infections, August 2005 for general organization and content of this document. 4 Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 6 Colonization ......................................................................................................................... 6 Transmission........................................................................................................................ 7 Screening and Surveillance ................................................................................................ 7 Diagnosis .............................................................................................................................. 8
  • In Vitro Susceptibilities of Escherichia Coli and Klebsiella Spp. To

    In Vitro Susceptibilities of Escherichia Coli and Klebsiella Spp. To

    Jpn. J. Infect. Dis., 60, 227-229, 2007 Short Communication In Vitro Susceptibilities of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella Spp. to Ampicillin-Sulbactam and Amoxicillin-Clavulanic Acid Birgul Kacmaz* and Nedim Sultan1 Department of Central Microbiology and 1Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey (Received January 30, 2007. Accepted April 13, 2007) SUMMARY: Ampicillin-sulbactam (A/S) and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (AUG) are thought to be equally efficacious clinically against the Enterobacteriaceae family. In this study, the in vitro activities of the A/S and AUG were evaluated and compared against Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were performed by standard agar dilution and disc diffusion techniques according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). During the study period, 973 strains were isolated. Of the 973 bacteria isolated, 823 were E. coli and 150 Klebsiella spp. More organisms were found to be susceptible to AUG than A/S, regardless of the susceptibility testing methodology. The agar dilution results of the isolates that were found to be sensitive or resistant were also compatible with the disc diffusion results. However, some differences were seen in the agar dilution results of some isolates that were found to be intermediately resistant with disc diffusion. In E. coli isolates, 17 of the 76 AUG intermediately resistant isolates (by disc diffusion), and 17 of the 63 A/S intermediately resistant isolates (by disc diffusion) showed different resistant patterns by agar dilution. When the CLSI breakpoint criteria are applied it should be considered that AUG and A/S sensitivity in E. coli and Klebsiella spp.
  • Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology: Discovering the Unseen World Through Hands-On Investigation

    Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology: Discovering the Unseen World Through Hands-On Investigation

    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Open Educational Resources Queensborough Community College 2016 Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology: Discovering the Unseen World Through Hands-On Investigation Joan Petersen CUNY Queensborough Community College Susan McLaughlin CUNY Queensborough Community College How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/qb_oers/16 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology: Discovering the Unseen World through Hands-On Investigation By Dr. Susan McLaughlin & Dr. Joan Petersen Queensborough Community College Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology: Discovering the Unseen World through Hands-On Investigation Table of Contents Preface………………………………………………………………………………………i Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………..ii Microbiology Lab Safety Instructions…………………………………………………...... iii Lab 1. Introduction to Microscopy and Diversity of Cell Types……………………......... 1 Lab 2. Introduction to Aseptic Techniques and Growth Media………………………...... 19 Lab 3. Preparation of Bacterial Smears and Introduction to Staining…………………...... 37 Lab 4. Acid fast and Endospore Staining……………………………………………......... 49 Lab 5. Metabolic Activities of Bacteria…………………………………………….…....... 59 Lab 6. Dichotomous Keys……………………………………………………………......... 77 Lab 7. The Effect of Physical Factors on Microbial Growth……………………………... 85 Lab 8. Chemical Control of Microbial Growth—Disinfectants and Antibiotics…………. 99 Lab 9. The Microbiology of Milk and Food………………………………………………. 111 Lab 10. The Eukaryotes………………………………………………………………........ 123 Lab 11. Clinical Microbiology I; Anaerobic pathogens; Vectors of Infectious Disease….. 141 Lab 12. Clinical Microbiology II—Immunology and the Biolog System………………… 153 Lab 13. Putting it all Together: Case Studies in Microbiology…………………………… 163 Appendix I.
  • Antibiotic Use Guidelines for Companion Animal Practice (2Nd Edition) Iii

    Antibiotic Use Guidelines for Companion Animal Practice (2Nd Edition) Iii

    ii Antibiotic Use Guidelines for Companion Animal Practice (2nd edition) iii Antibiotic Use Guidelines for Companion Animal Practice, 2nd edition Publisher: Companion Animal Group, Danish Veterinary Association, Peter Bangs Vej 30, 2000 Frederiksberg Authors of the guidelines: Lisbeth Rem Jessen (University of Copenhagen) Peter Damborg (University of Copenhagen) Anette Spohr (Evidensia Faxe Animal Hospital) Sandra Goericke-Pesch (University of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover) Rebecca Langhorn (University of Copenhagen) Geoffrey Houser (University of Copenhagen) Jakob Willesen (University of Copenhagen) Mette Schjærff (University of Copenhagen) Thomas Eriksen (University of Copenhagen) Tina Møller Sørensen (University of Copenhagen) Vibeke Frøkjær Jensen (DTU-VET) Flemming Obling (Greve) Luca Guardabassi (University of Copenhagen) Reproduction of extracts from these guidelines is only permitted in accordance with the agreement between the Ministry of Education and Copy-Dan. Danish copyright law restricts all other use without written permission of the publisher. Exception is granted for short excerpts for review purposes. iv Foreword The first edition of the Antibiotic Use Guidelines for Companion Animal Practice was published in autumn of 2012. The aim of the guidelines was to prevent increased antibiotic resistance. A questionnaire circulated to Danish veterinarians in 2015 (Jessen et al., DVT 10, 2016) indicated that the guidelines were well received, and particularly that active users had followed the recommendations. Despite a positive reception and the results of this survey, the actual quantity of antibiotics used is probably a better indicator of the effect of the first guidelines. Chapter two of these updated guidelines therefore details the pattern of developments in antibiotic use, as reported in DANMAP 2016 (www.danmap.org).