Sepsis can be fatal if adequate attention is not paid in the early stages (
14). Interventions to identify and treat sepsis as soon as possible in developing countries have been shown to reduce mortality in children (
1,
15). Thus, immediate identification of the etiological agents of septicemia in developing countries will play an important role in any future management strategy (
1). Proper antibiotics usage in the early management periods is linked with survival (
1). However, the diversity of bacterial pathogens, often even in the tropics, is a potential obstacle against effective empirical therapy. In a previous study by Japoni et al. in Shiraz, Iran, 25 individual pathogens accounted for the etiology of septicemia (
16). However, defining the epidemiology of all causative agents of sepsis in developing countries seems indispensable to introducing the most cost-effective interventions in these countries (
1).
In the current study, 15.1% of blood cultures yielded bacterial growth, a rate higher than that in previous reports from Shiraz, with rates of 12.1% reported by Japoni et al. between the years 2001 and 2004 (
16). However, our study was restricted to neonatal and pediatric wards, whereas the study of Japoni et al. included adult wards as well.
Bacterial isolation from blood samples is reported with various frequencies in other parts of the country. Aletayeb et al. from Ahvaz reported the lowest isolation rate (4.1%); also, Karambin et al. from Rasht and Gheibi et al. from Urmia reported isolation rates of 10.6% and 11%, respectively (
17-
19).
The reports published by two separate studies carried out in Uganda and Nigeria show higher isolation rates compared to ours: 32.5% and 16.5%, respectively. On the other hand, a very low isolation rate (2.3%) was observed in a study conducted in Kuwait by Mokaddas et al. (
6,
20,
21).
In agreement with a previous study conducted in Shiraz by Japoni et al., in our study, Gram positive cocci, with an isolation rate of 68.9%, were the predominant organisms of septicemia (
16). However, in Japoni et al.’s study, because of the study design and elimination of CoNS results for their potential contamination of adult blood cultures, Staphylococcus aureus was reported as the most frequent Gram positive cocci (25%) (
16). In our study, the S. aureus isolation rate reached a maximum of 1.4%, and considering the important role of CoNS in nosocomial infections of the neonatal and pediatric population (
22-
24),
S. epidermidis was the most frequent Gram positive cocci, with an isolation rate of 48.6%. In addition, the results from repeated sampling and cultures do not suggest the possibility of contamination of specimens.
E. coli, with a rate of 12.1%, was introduced as the most common Gram negative isolate by Japoni et al. (
16), whereas
Acinetobacter spp. (8.1%) was isolated as the leading Gram negative pathogen in our study.
Acinetobacter spp. has become a growing cause of nosocomial infections and has been known to cause different kinds of opportunistic infections (
25,
26). In recent years, the
Acinetobacter spp. isolation rate in our region, especially at Nemazee Hospital, has been remarkable (
25,
27)
Etiological agents of septicemia have varied in previous reports from Iranian studies. In agreement with our study, Gheibi et al. from Urmia reported Gram positive cocci, especially CoNS, as the most prevalent agents of neonatal septicemia (
19). However, Aletayeb et al. from Ahvaz and Karambin et al. from Rasht mentioned Gram negative isolates
Klebsiella pneumonia and
Enterobacter spp., respectively as causative agents of septicemia (
17,
18).
Some reports from our neighboring countries, Kuwait and India, are similar to ours in that they have shown Gram positive cocci as the most common pathogens isolated from blood cultures (
6,
14).
Overall, our Gram positive isolates showed less sensitivity to the tested antibacterial agents when compared to the results of a previous study by Japoni et al. from Shiraz. However, similar to our findings, Japoni et al. found vancomycin (98.4%) and chloramphenicol (86.4%) to be the most effective antibiotics for Gram positive isolates in vitro (
16). But in contrast to our study, in which resistance to cephalexin (86.3%) was considerably higher for Gram positive isolates, in Japoni et al.’s study, this resistance rate reached 19.6% (
16). Among the Gram negative isolates, this different pattern can still be seen; ciprofloxacin from our study was substituted with imipenem in the study by Japoni et al. as the most effective agent against Gram negative isolates (
16).
Aletayeb et al. from Ahvaz reported imipenem as the best in vitro choice for their recovered Gram negative isolates (
17), whereas Karambin et al. from Rasht with results closest to ours stated that ciprofloxacin was the most effective agent for Gram negative isolates (
18). These differences in antibacterial susceptibility patterns are also observed in other reports from our neighboring countries (
6,
14).
The findings of the current survey highlight the variable nature of etiological agents of septicemia and their antibiotic susceptibility patterns both in time and location, not only among different geographical locations and but also within the same region. Therefore, it is reasonable to continually assess the pathogens most frequently associated with blood stream infections and their resistance patterns to locally available antibiotics. The results of our study provide useful information for more effective empirical therapies and optimizing institutional infection control policies.