In the current comparative study, which took place in the NICU of the Mofid hospital, we evaluated the pattern of microbiology and antibiogram sensitivity between two years, with a 23-year interval between them. Our study showed that the rate of resistance to aminoglycosides and cephalosporins increased. Because the first antibiotic regimens in neonatal early and late onset sepsis require these two commonly used antibiotics, such an increase in microbial resistance is predictable. Similar to our study, the research of Marzban in 2010 (
7) showed that when microbial patterns in 1990 - 1992 and 2004 - 2007 were compared, the causes of neonatal sepsis had changed, meaning that during the first period of study in 1992, the most commonly detected bacteria were gram negative bacteria (66%) and
Staphylococcus aureus (34%). During the second period in 2014, 56.6% of the bacteria were gram negative, and bacterial resistance had increased.
In our study, staphylococci were the most common microorganisms during both years; however, there were no cases of
Ascinetobacter or
Enterococci in blood cultures from 1992, but 4.5% and 0.97% of the cultures in 2015 were positive for
Ascinetobacter and
Enterococci, respectively. In addition,
Pseudomonas aeroginousa was more prevalent in 2015 than 1992 (
Figure 1).
The incidence of listeria monocytogen infection in neonates is 4 - 6%, and coverage of
Listeria is recommended for treatment of neonatal sepsis; however, in our study,
Listeria monocytogen was found in 1.72% of neonatal sepsis cases in 1992, but no cases were found in 2015. In some countries, such as the United States, there was a decrease in the incidence of this pathogen between 2003 and 2007; however, in in England, it increased (
9). A relatively low incidence of listeria infection in the NICU of Mofid hospital may be due to higher admission rates of neonates with late onset sepsis and surgery problems. In the nursery and medical NICUs, the prevalence of listeria infection is probably greater than in our study.
Salmonella infection is rare in neonatal periods, but there are some case reports of it, such as those of Sharan and Kumar (
10), who in 2013 reported two cases of
Salmonella infection. In our study, we found that 7.23% of blood cultures in 1992 were positive for
Salmonella, but no cases of
Salmonella were found in 2015. This may be due to increasing levels of hygiene in families and more breast feeding of neonates.
Staphylococcal species most notably
S. epidermidis and
S. aureus cause approximately 60 - 70% of infections (
11). The research of Hamer et al. (
12) showed that
Staphylococcus aureus was the most common cause of neonatal sepsis in 2015 in six countries: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Ghana, India, Pakistan, and South Africa. Our study showed that the Staphylococcal species was most common; in 1992, the most prevalent was
Staphylococcus aureus, and in 2015, it was CONS.
Considering that surgery is a risk factor for staphylococcal infections and the Mofid hospital is a tertiary referral center for surgical problems, this result is acceptable. In this respect, it is important that appropriate antibiotics be selected to cover this microorganism. In 1992, antibiograms revealed that staphylococcal infection had sensitivity to oxacillin at a rate of 22 - 50%; however, in 2015, just 5.8% had sensitivity, and the rate of resistance increased to 22 - 50% in 2015. This indicates that the use of this antibiotic in critically-ill neonates with suspected methicillin resistant staphylococcal infection is not justified.
The results for vancomycin susceptibility are as follows: 40.8% sensitivity vs. 4.9% resistance; this is promising. The restrictive use of this drug in neonates explains this promising data. However, in a study by Lawrence et al. in 2006 (
13), which compared of vancomycin and cloxacillin in late onset sepsis, cloxacillin was found to be as effective as vancomycin, and the researchers recommended restricting vancomycin for confirmed cases of CONS sepsis resistant to oxacillin. This significantly reduced vancomycin use in the NICU; however, this study was older than our research, and more resistant forms of microorganisms have since developed.
In a study conducted by Hsiu-Mei Wei in 2015 (
14), multidrug resistant
Acinetobacter in the NICU were evaluated, revealing the following:
Acinetobacter was resistant to amikacin, ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin, cefpirome, cefepime, gentamicin, imipenem, levofloxacin, meropenem, ampicillin-sulbactam, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, and piperacillin/tazobactam. However,
Acinetobacter was sensitive to colistin and tigecycline. These results are similar to those of our study, in which sensitivity rates to antibiotics were very low and the resistance rates were high (100% for piperacillin and ciprofloxacillin, 80% for gentamycin and cefepim, 60% for amikacin).
In another study about
Acinetobacter sepsis in newborns by Asit Mishra (
15) in 1998, which was conducted in India, 251 positive blood cultures were analyzed, with the following results: 31.5% prevalence of A
cinetobacter, 26.3% prevalence of
E. coli, 10.7% prevalence of
Klebicella, 7.2% prevalence of pseudomonas, 4% prevalence of CONS, and 16.3% prevalence of staph coagulase positive. These results were in contrast to the results of our study in 1992, which revealed a 59% prevalence of
Staphylococcus aureus and a 40.9% prevalence of staph epidermis, with no cases of
Acinetobacter.
We did not find any fungal infection cases in our study. This may be because of the low incidence of fungal infection in our NICU and the low sample size of the research.
We did not use viral or anaerobic cultures for evaluation of neonatal sepsis, and for this reason, we do not have any information about viral or anaerobic infection in our NICU.
Other limitations of our study include small sample size and the fact that not all antibiotic disks in the antibiogram plates were used in all positive blood cultures, and this can limit the accuracy of antibiotic susceptibility pattern analysis.
5.1. Conclusion
In this research, we found that the pattern of microbial and antibiotic sensitivity has changed, and overall antibiotic resistance is increasing. This is an indication that healthcare providers should use broad-spectrum antibiotics with caution; otherwise, perhaps a day will come when there are no antibiotics for resistant bacteria.