Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 74122

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionKey MessageAcknowledgementReferences
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri

"The Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) has been in operation since almost a decade. It has contributed a huge number of peer reviewed articles, across a spectrum of medical disciplines, to the medical literature.
Its wide based indexing and open access publications attracts many authors as well as readers
For authors, the manuscripts can be uploaded online through an easily navigable portal, on other hand, reviewers appreciate the systematic handling of all manuscripts. The way JCDR has emerged as an effective medium for publishing wide array of observations in Indian context, I wish the editorial team success in their endeavour"



Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri
Faculty, Pediatric Medicine
Super Speciality Paediatric Hospital and Post Graduate Teaching Institute, Noida
On Sep 2018




Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dematolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2010 | Month : December | Volume : 4 | Issue : 6 | Page : 3400 - 3404

Antimicrobial Sensitivity Pattern Among Organisms Which Were Isolated From The Endotracheal Aspirates Of Patients With Ventilator Associated Pneumonia

PETER GEORGE1 AND ANITHA SEQUIERA2

1 MD, Department of Medicine, Yenepoya Medical College, Mangalore, India; 2 MBBS, Department of Medicine, Fr Muller Medical College, Mangalore,India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr Peter George MD, Department of Medicine,
Yenepoya Medical College, University Road,
Mangalore, Karnataka State, India.575018.
E mail: drpetergeorge2002@yahoo.com
Phone: +91 9845177660; +91 824 2204668/69/70,
Fax: +91 824 2204667

Abstract

Ventilator associated Pneumonia (VAP) is seen in 9 to 27% of all endo-trachealy intubated patients.
Aim and objectives: To study antimicrobial sensitivity among organisms isolated from endo-tracheal (ET) aspirates of patients with VAP.
Materials and methods: This retrospective study is designed to collect with data from medical records of patients admitted to the ICU of a tertiary referral hospital in the previous calendar year. 50 cases with VAP admitted to ICU were randomly selected and assessed for their clinical parameters (history and clinical examination) and investigations.
Results: ET aspirate culture and sensitivity sampling done in 50 subjects, only 32 samples yielded significant growth. Acinetobacter were isolated in 37.5%(12), Pseudomonas in 21.87%(7), Klebsiella in 15.6%(5), Enterobacter in 12.5%(4), Citrobacter in 6.25%(2 )and Staphylococcus in 6.25%(2 ). Acinetobacter were sensitive to Amikacin (44.66 %), Gatifloxacin & Imipenem (33.33%), Meropenem &Cefaperazone (25 %). Pseudomonas were sensitive to Amikacin, Pipercillin, Cefaperazone (85.71%), Ceftriaxone (71.42 %), Imipenem, Meropenem and Gatifloxacin (57.14 %).
Conclusion: The commonest organism isolated ET aspirate cultures were Acinetobacter, as seen in similar Indian studies. The infections can be reduced by practicing aseptic measures in ICU. The overall outcome of VAP varies with the antibiotic policies of individual centers.

Keywords

Multidrug-resistant organisms, Ventilator associated pneumonia, VAP, Mechanical Ventilation, Endo-tracheal aspirates.

INTRODUCTION:
Pneumonia is the commonest infection among patients in intensive care facilities across the world. It ranks worst among patient morbidity and mortality cases in hospital acquired infections. Among the causes of hospital acquired pneumonias, Ventilator Associated Pneumonia (VAP) is important as it worsens the outcome and the cost of in-hospital treatment. VAP is a nosocomial pneumonia developing in a patient after 48 hours of mechanical ventilation, and could be early or late depending on the onset. The mortality and the morbidity associated with VAP depend on the early identification of the disease and the initiation of appropriate therapy. The use of appropriate antibiotics which are directed towards the most prevalent organism improves the cure rate and survival, and also reduces the emergence of resistant strains. However, there are many controversies in Indian centres regarding the epidemiology, aetiology, diagnosis, therapy, anti microbial resistance and the outcome of VAP.

AIM OF THE STUDY
To study the antimicrobial sensitivity among organisms which were isolated from the endo-tracheal aspirates of patients with ventilator associated pneumonias.

Material and Methods

Source of data: The data was collected from medical records of the patients who were admitted to the ICU of a tertiary care centre in the past one year, and who were on mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours.

Method of collection of data:
Study design: This was a retrospective study. The data were collected from the case records of the patients who were admitted to the tertiary care centre. From the patients who were admitted to the ICU during the past one year, 50 case records were randomly selected.
We assessed the clinical parameters (history and clinical examination) and investigations. This included the blood counts, renal function tests, blood glucose, liver function tests, electrocardiogram, endo-tracheal aspirates for gram staining and culture, blood culture, ABG and chest x-rays or any other relevant investigations.

The clinical pulmonary infection score (CPIS) was tabulated from the available data (includes temperature, leukocytes, tracheal aspirate volume and the purulence of tracheal secretions, chest X-ray, oxygenation-PaO2/FiO2 and the semi-quantitative culture of the tracheal aspirates). The patients with CPIS which was more than 6, were considered to have developed VAP. VAP was diagnosed by the growth of pathogenic organisms > or =105CFU/ml.

Inclusion Criteria
All patients were subjected to mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours in the ICU in the past one year.

Exclusion Criteria
• Patients having Pneumonia prior to MV.
• Patients having pulmonary oedema.
• Patients having Adult respiratory distress Syndrome (ARDS).

Data Analysis:
The data were analyzed by using the Chi-square test.

Results

The present study shows that VAP was more common in patients who were aged more than 60 years. The mortality rate was high among them. Gender had no relationship with VAP. In this study, patients with more than two associated comorbid factors developed VAP and the mortality rate was high among them.

A total of 50 VAP patients were studied, out of which 32 were positive for culture. Acinetobacter was the most common organism which was found to cause VAP, followed by Pseudomonas .Other organisms are Klebsiella, Citrobacter, Enterobacter and MRSA. Acinetobacter was isolated in 37.5% samples, followed by Pseudomonas (in 21.87% samples), Klebsiella (in 15.6% samples), Enterobacter (in 12.5% samples) and Citrobacter and Staphylococcus (in 6.25% samples).
Acinetobacter was sensitive to Amikacin (44.66%), Gatifloxacin and Imipenem (33.33%), Meropenem and Cefaperazone (25%). Pseudomonas was sensitive to Amikacin, Pipercillin, Cefaperazone (85.71%), Ceftriaxone (71.42%), Imipenem, Meropenem and Gatifloxacin (57.14%). Klebsiella was sensitive to Imipenem (100%), Piperacillin, Meropenem (80%) and Cefaperazone(60%). The antibiotic sensitivity patterns of various isolated organisms are depicted in (Table/Fig 1).

(Table/Fig 1): Antibiotic sensitivity pattern of Acinetobacter, Pseudomonas, Klebsiella
The clinical diagnosis of the patients who developed VAP at the time of admission was widely varying. Among the VAP patients, nine had diabetes (18%), six had IHD (12%), eight had CRF (16%), 6 had COPD with respiratory failure (12%), one had stroke (2%), three had sepsis (6%) and 5 had OP poisoning (10%).

Discussion

VAP is defined as nosocomial pneumonia (1), (2) developing in a patient after 48 hours of mechanical ventilation. The incidences of VAP tend to increase with the duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) (1).

The estimated prevalence of VAP ranges from 10 to 65%, with a 20% case fatality (2), (3). Ventilator-associated pneumonia is an important ICU infection in mechanically ventilated patients. It accounts for 13-18% of all hospital acquired infections. From recent studies, it was shown that VAP was the most common infectious complication among patients who were admitted to the ICU. The complications and treatment cost significantly rises with VAP caused by resistant organisms, due to the cost of newer broad spectrum anti microbials and supportive measures. In various studies, the incidence of VAP was found to vary from 7% to 70%. A similar incidence was found in studies done by Rakshit et al (1) and Andrade et al (2).
The diagnostic criteria(5) for VAP in patients receiving mechanical ventilation is the presence of two or more of the following clinical features: temperature of > 38°C or < 36°C; leukopaenia or leukocytosis; purulent tracheal secretions; and decreased PaO2. If two or more of these abnormalities are present, a chest radiograph should be evaluated for alveolar infiltrates or an air bronchogram sign. Quantitative procedures for adequate sampling of the respiratory aspirates should be done, based on the local expertise and the cost considerations. Empirical anti microbial therapy and supportive care should be initiated by the subject’s clinical state, clinical suspicion, and the available investigations.

The causative organisms vary with the patients' demographics in the ICU, the method of diagnosis, the duration of hospital stay, and the institutional antimicrobial policies. VAP may be caused by a wide spectrum of bacterial pathogens. In the present study, gram negative bacteriae were the most common pathogens of VAP, as also observed in other studies. The common pathogens which were isolated were the aerobic gram-negative bacilli such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter species and gram-positive cocci like Staphylococcus aureus (1), (2).
Recent studies have shown the increasing incidence of multidrug resistant pathogens (MDR) among the patients with VAP (1), (4), (5). A study by Dey (6) showed the increased incidence of MDR pathogens in endo-tracheal aspirates.

Multidrug resistant organisms are increasing in our ICU’s. Earlier studies have shown that Pseudomonas is the most common organism (1). In the present study, Acinetobacter species was found to be the most common organism causing VAP, followed by Pseudomonas species. Although the Acinetobacter species is less virulent than Pseudomonas, they are becoming more and more resistant to the commonly used antimicrobial agents. Acinetobacter and Pseudomonas (1), (3), (7) were the most common organisms which were isolated in their study. Due to the increasing incidence of MDR organisms in ICUs, an early and correct diagnosis of VAP is a challenge for optimal antibiotic treatment. The emergence of MDR pathogens can be prevented by adopting an antibiotic institutional policy and dose de-escalation regimens (5), (6).

Isolation of the causative organism from ET secretions and its culture sensitivity is crucial in the management of VAP. The sample can either be collected by invasive (broncho-alveolar lavage [BAL]) or non-invasive (endo-tracheal aspirate [ETA]) techniques (8), (9), (10), (11). Aerobic and anaerobic cultures may be done to isolate the microbe. Heyland (8) and his colleagues showed that there was no significant difference between broncho-alveolar lavage and endo-tracheal aspiration, when they were used as diagnostic techniques for culturing microorganisms which cause VAP. Similar findings were seen in a study done by Peter et al in Vellore (9).
The early diagnosis and institution of appropriate antimicrobial therapy has shown reduced patient mortality (12). The mortality rates in VAP varied from 20-75%, in different studies done by Rakshit et al and Andrade et al. The mortality rate in the present study among patients who developed VAP was found to be 50% (12), (13).
A study by Katherason SG and associates, observed that the device-related VAP infection rate was 27.0 %, with a mechanical ventilator utilization rate of 88.7% (15). The most common causative pathogens in this study were K pneumoniae and Acinetobacter (16). Age, gender and race were not identified as the risk factors in this study. In our study, patients aged more than 60 had a higher incidence of VAP and gender had no significant role in VAP.

The incidence of VAP can be prevented by adopting careful intubation techniques, oral tubation, avoiding gastric over- distension, maintaining adequate endo tracheal cuff pressure and efficient tracheal toileting (17). This study helped us in the early diagnosis of VAP and also to determine the incidence of MDR organisms which cause VAP. The antibiotic susceptibility pattern helped the clinicians to choose the appropriate antibiotics for prophylactic and treatment purposes (17).

Conclusion

The commonest organism which was isolated from the ET aspirate cultures were Acinetobacter, as seen in various studies done in India. A majority of the organisms which were isolated, were sensitive to amikacin. Multidrug resistant organisms are increasing in our ICU. The mortality rate which was associated with VAP, was higher in patients aged above 60 years. The infection rates could possibly be reduced by practicing aseptic measures in the ICU. The overall outcome of VAPs could improve with the anti-microbial policies of individual centers. However, there are many controversies in the Indian centres, regarding the epidemiology, aetiology, diagnosis, therapy, resistance and the prognosis of VAP. Hence, there is a need for larger studies.

Key Message

The advent of many newer antibiotics in the past decade has not brought down the mortality in the critical care facilities across the world, associated with ventilator associated pneumonias. Due to the high incidence of VAP in our critical care facility we did this study to identify the culture sensitivity pattern of microbial isolates from endotracheal aspirates.

Acknowledgement

Dr Narasimha Hegde, Dept of Medicine, Fr Muller Medical College for the encouragement to publish this manuscript.

References

1.
Rakshith P, Nagar V S, Deshpande A K. Incidence, clinical outcome and risk stratification of VAP- A prospective cohort study. Indian J of Crit Care Med. 2005; 9: 211-6.
2.
Andrade L, Vilela C A P, Cezario R C, Almeida A B, Filho P G. Ventilator Associated Pneumonia in an Adult Clinical- Surgical Intensive Care Unit of a Brazilian University Hospital: Incidence, Risk Factors, Etiology, and Antibiotic Resistance. The Brazilian J Inf Dis. 2008; 12: 80-5.
3.
Alp E and Voss A, Ventilator associated pneumonia and infection control, Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials. 2006, 5; 7: 1-11.
4.
Erbay R H, Yalcin A N, Zencir M, Serin S, Atalay H. Costs and risk factors for ventilator-associated pneumonia in a Turkish University Hospital's Intensive Care Unit: A case-control study. BMC Pulm Med. 2004; 4: 3.
5.
Ronald F G, Alan F. Evidence-Based Assessment of Diagnostic Tests for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Executive Summary. Chest 2000; 117:177S-181S; doi:10.1378/chest.117.4_suppl_2.177S
6.
Dey A, Bairy I. Incidence of multidrug Resistant organisms causing ventilator associated pneumonias in a tertiary care hospital: A nine months prospective study. Ann Th Med. 2007; 2: 52-7.
7.
Granacho-Montero J,Ortiz -Leyba C, Fernandez-Hinojosa E, Aldabo- Pallas T,Cayuela A, Marquez-Vacaro J A et al. Acinetobacter Baumani Ventilator associated pneumonia: epidemilogical and clinical findings. Chest J. 2005; 31: 649-55.
8.
Katherason Heyland D, Cook D, Dodek P and Muscedere J. A Randomized Trial of Diagnostic Techniques for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355: 2619-30.
9.
Peter J V, Chacko B, Moran J L, Comparison of closed endotracheal suction versus open endotracheal suction in the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care patients: An evaluation using meta-analytic techniques. Indian J Med Sci. 2007; 61: 201-11.
10.
Nieto J M S, Torres A, Cordoba F G, Ebiary M E, Carrillo A, Ruiz J etal. Impact of Invasive and Noninvasive Quantitative Culture Sampling on Outcome of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Pilot Study. Am J Resp Crit Care Med. 1998; 157: 371-6.
11.
Pugin J, Auckenthaler R, Mili N. Diagnosis of VAP. Am Rev Respirator Dis. 1991; 143: 1121-9.
12.
Iregui M, Ward S, Sherman G, Fraser V J, Kollef M H. Clinical Importance of Delays in the initiation of Appropriate Antibiotic Treatment for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. Chest J. 2002; 122: 262-8.
13.
Chastre J, Fagon JY. Ventilator-associated pneumonia. Principles of Critical Care. 1998. pp 617-47.
14.
Kollef MH, Silver P, Murphy DM. The effect of VAP in determining mortality. Chest. 1995; 108: 1655-62.
15.
Katherason SG, Naing L, Jaalam K, Musa K I, Mohamad N A N, Aiyar S etal. Ventilator-associated nosocomial pneumonia in intensive care units in Malaysia. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2009; 3: 704-10
16.
Sa Borges M, Correa H. Variations in etiology of VAP. Respirator Crit Care Med. 1999; 160: 608-13.
17.
Deja M, Spies C. Prevention measures of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med. 2009; 37:330-2.

Tables and Figures
[Table / Fig - 1]
JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com