METHODS: Genome of C. freundii B9-C2 was sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq platform. The assembled genome was annotated and deposited into GenBank under the accession number CP027849.
RESULTS: Multiple antimicrobial resistance genes including blaCMY-66 were identified. Further, the presence of 15 antibiotic efflux pump-encoding resistance genes, including crp, baeR, hns, patA, emrB, msbA, acrA, acrB, emrR, mdtC, mdtB, mdtG, kdpE, mdfA and msrB, were detected and likely to account for the observed cephalosporins, carbapenems, aminoglycosides and monobactams resistance in C. freundii B9-C2. The isolate also presented unique virulence genes related to biofilm formation, motility and iron uptake. The genome was compared to publicly available genomes and it was closely related to strains with environmental origins.
CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of intestinal carriage of colistin-resistant C. freundii from the stool of a neonate in Malaysia. Using genomic analysis, we have contributed to the understanding of the potential mechanism of resistance and the phylogenetic relationship of the isolates with draft genomes available in the public domain.
OBJECTIVES: We examined data from Cochrane Neonatal reviews to assess whether conditions that constituted KSD were included as key outcomes and how commonly they occurred in the population studied.
METHODS: We identified Cochrane reviews, published till November 2017 that evaluated interventions for neonatal jaundice (NNJ). We extracted the following information at the review and study levels: included population, outcomes assessed (in particular, whether PIOs such as KSD were listed as the primary outcomes), as well as their cumulative incidence in the reviews.
RESULTS: Out of 311 reviews, 11 evaluated interventions for NNJ with 78 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included. Among the reviews, a total number of 148 outcomes were predefined and 30 (20.3%) were PIOs related to KSD, with 11 (36.7%) listed as primary outcomes. Among the 78 included RCTs (total participants = 8,232), 38 (48.7%) enrolled predominantly high-risk and 40 (51.3%) enrolled predominantly low-risk population. A total number of 431 outcomes were reported, and 40 (9.2%) were PIOs related to KSD (of which 37 were from studies with high-risk infants), with 13 (32.5%) listed as primary outcome. Cumulatively, no infant developed KSD across all studies.
CONCLUSIONS: There is suboptimal representation of PIOs such as KSD in neonatal trials and Cochrane reviews on NNJ. Over half of the trials included populations with very low risk of KSD, which does not represent judicious use of resources. Amidst our continued search for a more reliable surrogate marker for NNJ, studies should evaluate the whole spectrum KSD alongside serum bilirubin in high-risk populations with sufficiently significant event rates, as this will make the trial methodologically feasible, with findings that will impact the population concerned.
METHODS: We prospectively recruited all neonates who had CDH repair in four hospitals in Malaysia from June 2018 to October 2020. Intra vesical pressure was used as a proxy for IAP and was measured for 5 consecutive days post surgery. The daily median value was used for analysis. We categorized IAP as <11 mmHg (no IAH), 11-15 mmHg (IAH), and >15 mmHg (severe IAH). Incidence of IAH, its effects on the duration of ventilatory support, and gastrointestinal function were studied.
RESULTS: There were 24 neonates included in this study. They were operated between day 1 and 6 of life (median: 4 days old). IAH was detected within the first 3 days post surgery, with 83% occurring on day one. Those requiring ventilatory support for more than 3 days contributed the largest proportion of IAH (n = 17, 71%). There was strong correlation between days of IAH and duration of ventilation (p
OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of different antiseptic solutions in preventing CRBSI and other related outcomes in neonates with CVC.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries up to 22 April 2022. We checked reference lists of included trials and systematic reviews that related to the intervention or population examined in this Cochrane Review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion in this review if they were performed in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and were comparing any antiseptic solution (single or in combination) against any other type of antiseptic solution or no antiseptic solution or placebo in preparation for central catheter insertion. We excluded cross-over trials and quasi-RCTs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methods from Cochrane Neonatal. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials that had two different comparisons: 2% chlorhexidine in 70% isopropyl alcohol (CHG-IPA) versus 10% povidone-iodine (PI) (two trials); and CHG-IPA versus 2% chlorhexidine in aqueous solution (CHG-A) (one trial). A total of 466 neonates from level III NICUs were evaluated. All included trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence for the primary and some important secondary outcomes ranged from very low to moderate. There were no included trials that compared antiseptic skin solutions with no antiseptic solution or placebo. CHG-IPA versus 10% PI Compared to PI, CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in CRBSI (risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 3.25; risk difference (RD) 0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.06; 352 infants, 2 trials, low-certainty evidence) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.68; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.06; 304 infants, 1 trial, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of CHG-IPA on CLABSI (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.08; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.11; 48 infants, 1 trial; very low-certainty evidence) and chemical burns (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.24 to 4.48; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 352 infants, 2 trials, very low-certainty evidence), compared to PI. Based on a single trial, infants receiving CHG-IPA appeared less likely to develop thyroid dysfunction compared to PI (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.85; RD -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 17, 95% CI 10 to 50; 304 infants). Neither of the two included trials assessed the outcome of premature central line removal or the proportion of infants or catheters with exit-site infection. CHG-IPA versus CHG-A The evidence suggests CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in the rate of proven CRBSI when applied on the skin of neonates prior to central line insertion (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.87; RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.13; 106 infants, 1 trial, low-certainty evidence) and CLABSI (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.84; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.15; 106 infants, 1 trial, low-certainty evidence), compared to CHG-A. Compared to CHG-A, CHG-IPA probably results in little to no difference in premature catheter removal (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.19; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.13; 106 infants, 1 trial, moderate-certainty evidence) and chemical burns (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.03; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.18; 114 infants, 1 trial, moderate-certainty evidence). No trial assessed the outcome of all-cause mortality and the proportion of infants or catheters with exit-site infection.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on current evidence, compared to PI, CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in CRBSI and mortality. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of CHG-IPA on CLABSI and chemical burns. One trial showed a statistically significant increase in thyroid dysfunction with the use of PI compared to CHG-IPA. The evidence suggests CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in the rate of proven CRBSI and CLABSI when applied on the skin of neonates prior to central line insertion. Compared to CHG-A, CHG-IPA probably results in little to no difference in chemical burns and premature catheter removal. Further trials that compare different antiseptic solutions are required, especially in low- and middle-income countries, before stronger conclusions can be made.