1.Specific effect of inserted sham acupuncture and its impact on the estimation of acupuncture treatment effect in randomized controlled trials: A systematic survey.
Xiao-Chao LUO ; Jia-Li LIU ; Ming-Hong YAO ; Ye-Meng CHEN ; Arthur Yin FAN ; Fan-Rong LIANG ; Ji-Ping ZHAO ; Ling ZHAO ; Xu ZHOU ; Xiao-Ying ZHONG ; Jia-Hui YANG ; Bo LI ; Ying ZHANG ; Xin SUN ; Ling LI
Journal of Integrative Medicine 2025;23(6):630-640
BACKGROUND:
The use of inserted sham acupuncture as a placebo in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is controversial, because it may produce specific effects that cause an underestimation of the effect of acupuncture treatment.
OBJECTIVE:
This systematic survey investigates the magnitude of insert-specific effects of sham acupuncture and whether they affect the estimation of acupuncture treatment effects.
SEARCH STRATEGY:
PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify acupuncture RCTs from their inception until December 2022.
INCLUSION CRITERIA:
RCTs that evaluated the effects of acupuncture compared to sham acupuncture and no treatment.
DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS:
The total effect measured for an acupuncture treatment group in RCTs were divided into three components, including the natural history and/or regression to the mean effect (controlled for no-treatment group), the placebo effect, and the specific effect of acupuncture. The first two constituted the contextual effect of acupuncture, which is mimicked by a sham acupuncture treatment group. The proportion of acupuncture total effect size was considered to be 1. The proportion of natural history and/or regression to the mean effect (PNE) and proportional contextual effect (PCE) of included RCTs were pooled using meta-analyses with a random-effect model. The proportion of acupuncture placebo effect was the difference between PCE and PNE in RCTs with non-inserted sham acupuncture. The proportion of insert-specific effect of sham acupuncture (PIES) was obtained by subtracting the proportion of acupuncture placebo effect and PNE from PCE in RCTs with inserted sham acupuncture. The impact of PIES on the estimation of acupuncture's treatment effect was evaluated by quantifying the percentage of RCTs that the effect of outcome changed from no statistical difference to statistical difference after removing PIES in the included studies, and the impact of PIES was externally validated in other acupuncture RCTs with an inserted sham acupuncture group that were not used to calculate PIES.
RESULTS:
This analysis included 32 studies with 5492 patients. The overall PNE was 0.335 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.255-0.415) and the PCE of acupuncture was 0.639 (95% CI, 0.567-0.710) of acupuncture's total effect. The proportional contribution of the placebo effect to acupuncture's total effect was 0.191, and the PIES was 0.189. When we modeled the exclusion of the insert-specific effect of sham acupuncture, the acupuncture treatment effect changed from no difference to a significant difference in 45.45% of the included RCTs, and in 40.91% of the external validated RCTs.
CONCLUSION
The insert-specific effect of sham acupuncture in RCTs represents 18.90% of acupuncture's total effect and significantly affects the evaluation of the acupuncture treatment effect. More than 40% of RCTs that used inserted sham acupuncture would draw different conclusions if the PIES had been controlled for. Considering the impact of the insert-specific effect of sham acupuncture, caution should be taken when using inserted sham acupuncture placebos in RCTs. Please cite this article as: Luo XC, Liu JL, Yao MH, Chen YM, Fan AY, Liang FR, Zhao JP, Zhao L, Zhou X, Zhong XY, Yang JH, Li B, Zhang Y, Sun X, Li L. Specific effect of inserted sham acupuncture and its impact on the estimation of acupuncture treatment effect in randomized controlled trials: A systematic survey. J Integr Med. 2025; 23(6):630-640.
Acupuncture Therapy/methods*
;
Humans
;
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
;
Placebo Effect
;
Placebos
;
Treatment Outcome
2.The practice of ethical collaborative review and mutual recognition model
Ping JI ; Danna ZHU ; Ping XIAO ; Weiwei XU ; Fuxuan LI ; Xiao LI ; Liping ZHOU
Chinese Medical Ethics 2024;37(5):550-555
With the development of more and more multi-center and cross-field cooperative medical research,the establishment of high-quality and efficient ethical collaborative review and mutual recognition systems is an inevitable demand for multi-institutional research,and an inevitable move to implement relevant national policies.Based on the work practice of ethical collaborative review and mutual recognition in Shenzhen,by analyzing the practical challenges of ethical collaborative review and mutual recognition in China,this paper proposed that to ensure the homogeneity and efficiency of review.Government departments need to take the lead,establish an ethical review alliance,and clarify responsibilities and rights.Based on actual needs,system first,and effective communication,ethical collaborative review and mutual recognition of results could be jointly promoted,aiming to provide a reference for our counterparts in China to promote ethical collaborative review and mutual recognition of cross-institutional research.
3.Clinical trial of brexpiprazole in the treatment of adults with acute schizophrenia
Shu-Zhe ZHOU ; Liang LI ; Dong YANG ; Jin-Guo ZHAI ; Tao JIANG ; Yu-Zhong SHI ; Bin WU ; Xiang-Ping WU ; Ke-Qing LI ; Tie-Bang LIU ; Jie LI ; Shi-You TANG ; Li-Li WANG ; Xue-Yi WANG ; Yun-Long TAN ; Qi LIU ; Uki MOTOMICHI ; Ming-Ji XIAN ; Hong-Yan ZHANG
The Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024;40(5):654-658
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brexpiprazole in treating acute schizophrenia.Methods Patients with schizophrenia were randomly divided into treatment group and control group.The treatment group was given brexpiprozole 2-4 mg·d-1 orally and the control group was given aripiprazole 10-20 mg·d-1orally,both were treated for 6 weeks.Clinical efficacy of the two groups,the response rate at endpoint,the changes from baseline to endpoint of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale(PANSS),Clinical Global Impression-Improvement(CGI-S),Personal and Social Performance scale(PSP),PANSS Positive syndrome subscale,PANSS negative syndrome subscale were compared.The incidence of treatment-related adverse events in two groups were compared.Results There were 184 patients in treatment group and 186 patients in control group.After treatment,the response rates of treatment group and control group were 79.50%(140 cases/184 cases)and 82.40%(150 cases/186 cases),the scores of CGI-I of treatment group and control group were(2.00±1.20)and(1.90±1.01),with no significant difference(all P>0.05).From baseline to Week 6,the mean change of PANSS total score wese(-30.70±16.96)points in treatment group and(-32.20±17.00)points in control group,with no significant difference(P>0.05).The changes of CGI-S scores in treatment group and control group were(-2.00±1.27)and(-1.90±1.22)points,PSP scores were(18.80±14.77)and(19.20±14.55)points,PANSS positive syndrome scores were(-10.30±5.93)and(-10.80±5.81)points,PANSS negative syndrome scores were(-6.80±5.98)and(-7.30±5.15)points,with no significant difference(P>0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events between the two group(69.00%vs.64.50%,P>0.05).Conclusion The non-inferiority of Brexpiprazole to aripiprazole was established,with comparable efficacy and acceptability.
4.Biomechanical Evaluation of 2 Endoscopic Spine Surgery Methods for Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Finite Element Study
Yang ZOU ; Shuo JI ; Hui Wen YANG ; Tao MA ; Yue Kun FANG ; Zhi Cheng WANG ; Miao Miao LIU ; Ping Hui ZHOU ; Zheng Qi BAO ; Chang Chun ZHANG ; Yu Chen YE
Neurospine 2024;21(1):273-285
Objective:
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of 2 endoscopic spine surgeries on the biomechanical properties of normal and osteoporotic spines.
Methods:
Based on computed tomography images of a healthy adult volunteer, 6 finite element models were created. After validating the normal intact model, a concentrated force of 400 N and a moment of 7.5 Nm were exerted on the upper surface of L3 to simulate 6 physiological activities of the spine. Five types of indices were used to assess the biomechanical properties of the 6 models, range of motion (ROM), maximum displacement value, intervertebral disc stress, maximum stress value, and articular protrusion stress, and by combining them with finite element stress cloud.
Results:
In normal and osteoporotic spines, there was no meaningful change in ROM or disc stress in the 2 surgical models for the 6 motion states. Model N1 (osteoporotic percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy model) showed a decrease in maximum displacement value of 20.28% in right lateral bending. Model M2 (unilateral biportal endoscopic model) increased maximum displacement values of 16.88% and 17.82% during left and right lateral bending, respectively. The maximum stress value of L4–5 increased by 11.72% for model M2 during left rotation. In addition, using the same surgical approach, ROM, maximum displacement values, disc stress, and maximum stress values were more significant in the osteoporotic model than in the normal model.
Conclusion
In both normal and osteoporotic spines, both surgical approaches were less disruptive to the physiologic structure of the spine. Furthermore, using the same endoscopic spine surgery, normal spine biomechanical properties are superior to osteoporotic spines.
5.Establishment of UPLC-DAD fingerprint of raw and vinegar Bupleurum bupleurum and study on spectral effect relationship of anti-hepatic fibrosis
Ni-Ping CHEN ; Yan WANG ; Yan DONG ; Yang-Xin XIAO ; Ji-Yuan TU ; Yan-Ju LIU ; Zhong-Shi ZHOU
Chinese Pharmacological Bulletin 2024;40(6):1145-1152
Aim To establish the fingerprint of raw bupleurum and vinegar bupleurum,investigate the difference in their anti-liver fibrosis effects,and ex-plore the relationship between the chemical composition of raw bupleurum and vinegar bupleurum and their an-ti-liver fibrosis efficacy.Methods The fingerprints of 10 batches of raw bupleuri and 10 batches of bupleuri were established by UPLC method.The liver fibrosis cell model in vitro was established by TGF-β induced LX-2 hepatic stellate cells.The liver fibrosis cell mod-el was analyzed with collagen type Ⅰ(col1a1)and α-smoothmuscleactin.The expression of α-SMA protein was used as the pharmacodynamic index.MetaboAna-lyst5.0 was used to screen the difference markers af-fecting the quality of raw bupledges and vinegar bu-pledges with VIP value>1 as the criterion.Orthogo-nal partial least squares discriminant analysis(OPLS-DA)was used to screen the main components of raw bupleurum and vinegar bupleurum against liver fibro-sis.Results There were 18 peaks in the UPLC fin-gerprints of raw bupleurum and vinegar bupleurum,and the analysis results showed that there were nine main differences between raw bupleurum and vinegar bupleurum,among which peaks 9,7 and 6 could be considered as bupleurin d,bupleurin a and bupleurin f.The results of spectral effect relationship showed that the main components of bupleurum anti-liver fibrosis were peaks 11,12,14,15 and 18.Conclusions The established fingerprint method of raw bupleurum and vinegar bupleurum is simple and feasible,and the important components of anti-liver fibrosis activity are screened through the spectrum effect relationship,which provides a basis for clarifying the material basis of anti-liver fibrosis effect of raw bupleurum and vine-gar bupleurum.
6.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report(2022): Gram-positive bacteria
Chaoqun YING ; Yunbo CHEN ; Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Haifeng MAO ; Hui DING ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Jiangqin SONG ; Yongyun LIU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Yan GENG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Lu WANG ; Yanyan LI ; Dan LIU ; Peng ZHANG ; Junmin CAO ; Xiaoyan LI ; Dijing SONG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Yanhong LI ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Guolin LIAO ; Ying HUANG ; Baohua ZHANG ; Liang GUO ; Aiyun LI ; Haiquan KANG ; Donghong HUANG ; Sijin MAN ; Zhuo LI ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Haixin DONG ; Donghua LIU ; Hongyun XU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Rong XU ; Lin ZHENG ; Shuyan HU ; Jian LI ; Qiang LIU ; Liang LUAN ; Jilu SHEN ; Lixia ZHANG ; Bo QUAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Xiaoyan QI ; Dengyan QIAO ; Weiping LIU ; Xiusan XIA ; Ling MENG ; Jinhua LIANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024;17(2):99-112
Objective:To report the results of national surveillance on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-positive bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2022.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-positive bacteria from blood cultures in member hospitals of National Bloodstream Infection Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System(BRICS)were collected during January 2022 to December 2022. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were conducted by agar dilution or broth dilution methods recommended by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 software were used to analyze the data.Results:A total of 3 163 strains of Gram-positive pathogens were collected from 51 member units,and the top five bacteria were Staphylococcus aureus( n=1 147,36.3%),coagulase-negative Staphylococci( n=928,29.3%), Enterococcus faecalis( n=369,11.7%), Enterococcus faecium( n=296,9.4%)and alpha-hemolyticus Streptococci( n=192,6.1%). The detection rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA)and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci(MRCNS)were 26.4%(303/1 147)and 66.7%(619/928),respectively. No glycopeptide and daptomycin-resistant Staphylococci were detected. The sensitivity rates of Staphylococcus aureus to cefpirome,rifampin,compound sulfamethoxazole,linezolid,minocycline and tigecycline were all >95.0%. Enterococcus faecium was more prevalent than Enterococcus faecalis. The resistance rates of Enterococcus faecium to vancomycin and teicoplanin were both 0.5%(2/369),and no vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium was detected. The detection rate of MRSA in southern China was significantly lower than that in other regions( χ2=14.578, P=0.002),while the detection rate of MRCNS in northern China was significantly higher than that in other regions( χ2=15.195, P=0.002). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS in provincial hospitals were higher than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=13.519 and 12.136, P<0.001). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS in economically more advanced regions(per capita GDP≥92 059 Yuan in 2022)were higher than those in economically less advanced regions(per capita GDP<92 059 Yuan)( χ2=9.969 and 7.606, P=0.002和0.006). Conclusions:Among the Gram-positive pathogens causing bloodstream infections in China, Staphylococci is the most common while the MRSA incidence decreases continuously with time;the detection rate of Enterococcus faecium exceeds that of Enterococcus faecalis. The overall prevalence of vancomycin-resistant Enterococci is still at a low level. The composition ratio of Gram-positive pathogens and resistant profiles varies slightly across regions of China,with the prevalence of MRSA and MRCNS being more pronounced in provincial hospitals and areas with a per capita GDP≥92 059 yuan.
7.Surveillance of bacterial resistance in tertiary hospitals across China:results of CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program in 2022
Yan GUO ; Fupin HU ; Demei ZHU ; Fu WANG ; Xiaofei JIANG ; Yingchun XU ; Xiaojiang ZHANG ; Fengbo ZHANG ; Ping JI ; Yi XIE ; Yuling XIAO ; Chuanqing WANG ; Pan FU ; Yuanhong XU ; Ying HUANG ; Ziyong SUN ; Zhongju CHEN ; Jingyong SUN ; Qing CHEN ; Yunzhuo CHU ; Sufei TIAN ; Zhidong HU ; Jin LI ; Yunsong YU ; Jie LIN ; Bin SHAN ; Yunmin XU ; Sufang GUO ; Yanyan WANG ; Lianhua WEI ; Keke LI ; Hong ZHANG ; Fen PAN ; Yunjian HU ; Xiaoman AI ; Chao ZHUO ; Danhong SU ; Dawen GUO ; Jinying ZHAO ; Hua YU ; Xiangning HUANG ; Wen'en LIU ; Yanming LI ; Yan JIN ; Chunhong SHAO ; Xuesong XU ; Wei LI ; Shanmei WANG ; Yafei CHU ; Lixia ZHANG ; Juan MA ; Shuping ZHOU ; Yan ZHOU ; Lei ZHU ; Jinhua MENG ; Fang DONG ; Zhiyong LÜ ; Fangfang HU ; Han SHEN ; Wanqing ZHOU ; Wei JIA ; Gang LI ; Jinsong WU ; Yuemei LU ; Jihong LI ; Qian SUN ; Jinju DUAN ; Jianbang KANG ; Xiaobo MA ; Yanqing ZHENG ; Ruyi GUO ; Yan ZHU ; Yunsheng CHEN ; Qing MENG ; Shifu WANG ; Xuefei HU ; Wenhui HUANG ; Juan LI ; Quangui SHI ; Juan YANG ; Abulimiti REZIWAGULI ; Lili HUANG ; Xuejun SHAO ; Xiaoyan REN ; Dong LI ; Qun ZHANG ; Xue CHEN ; Rihai LI ; Jieli XU ; Kaijie GAO ; Lu XU ; Lin LIN ; Zhuo ZHANG ; Jianlong LIU ; Min FU ; Yinghui GUO ; Wenchao ZHANG ; Zengguo WANG ; Kai JIA ; Yun XIA ; Shan SUN ; Huimin YANG ; Yan MIAO ; Mingming ZHOU ; Shihai ZHANG ; Hongjuan LIU ; Nan CHEN ; Chan LI ; Jilu SHEN ; Wanqi MEN ; Peng WANG ; Xiaowei ZHANG ; Yanyan LIU ; Yong AN
Chinese Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy 2024;24(3):277-286
Objective To monitor the susceptibility of clinical isolates to antimicrobial agents in tertiary hospitals in major regions of China in 2022.Methods Clinical isolates from 58 hospitals in China were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility using a unified protocol based on disc diffusion method or automated testing systems.Results were interpreted using the 2022 Clinical &Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI)breakpoints.Results A total of 318 013 clinical isolates were collected from January 1,2022 to December 31,2022,of which 29.5%were gram-positive and 70.5%were gram-negative.The prevalence of methicillin-resistant strains in Staphylococcus aureus,Staphylococcus epidermidis and other coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species(excluding Staphylococcus pseudintermedius and Staphylococcus schleiferi)was 28.3%,76.7%and 77.9%,respectively.Overall,94.0%of MRSA strains were susceptible to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and 90.8%of MRSE strains were susceptible to rifampicin.No vancomycin-resistant strains were found.Enterococcus faecalis showed significantly lower resistance rates to most antimicrobial agents tested than Enterococcus faecium.A few vancomycin-resistant strains were identified in both E.faecalis and E.faecium.The prevalence of penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae was 94.2%in the isolates from children and 95.7%in the isolates from adults.The resistance rate to carbapenems was lower than 13.1%in most Enterobacterales species except for Klebsiella,21.7%-23.1%of which were resistant to carbapenems.Most Enterobacterales isolates were highly susceptible to tigecycline,colistin and polymyxin B,with resistance rates ranging from 0.1%to 13.3%.The prevalence of meropenem-resistant strains decreased from 23.5%in 2019 to 18.0%in 2022 in Pseudomonas aeruginosa,and decreased from 79.0%in 2019 to 72.5%in 2022 in Acinetobacter baumannii.Conclusions The resistance of clinical isolates to the commonly used antimicrobial agents is still increasing in tertiary hospitals.However,the prevalence of important carbapenem-resistant organisms such as carbapenem-resistant K.pneumoniae,P.aeruginosa,and A.baumannii showed a downward trend in recent years.This finding suggests that the strategy of combining antimicrobial resistance surveillance with multidisciplinary concerted action works well in curbing the spread of resistant bacteria.
8.Changing distribution and resistance profiles of common pathogens isolated from urine in the CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program,2015-2021
Yanming LI ; Mingxiang ZOU ; Wen'en LIU ; Yang YANG ; Fupin HU ; Demei ZHU ; Yingchun XU ; Xiaojiang ZHANG ; Fengbo ZHANG ; Ping JI ; Yi XIE ; Mei KANG ; Chuanqing WANG ; Pan FU ; Yuanhong XU ; Ying HUANG ; Ziyong SUN ; Zhongju CHEN ; Yuxing NI ; Jingyong SUN ; Yunzhuo CHU ; Sufei TIAN ; Zhidong HU ; Jin LI ; Yunsong YU ; Jie LIN ; Bin SHAN ; Yan DU ; Sufang GUO ; Lianhua WEI ; Fengmei ZOU ; Hong ZHANG ; Chun WANG ; Yunjian HU ; Xiaoman AI ; Chao ZHUO ; Danhong SU ; Dawen GUO ; Jinying ZHAO ; Hua YU ; Xiangning HUANG ; Yan JIN ; Chunhong SHAO ; Xuesong XU ; Chao YAN ; Shanmei WANG ; Yafei CHU ; Lixia ZHANG ; Juan MA ; Shuping ZHOU ; Yan ZHOU ; Lei ZHU ; Jinhua MENG ; Fang DONG ; Zhiyong LÜ ; Fangfang HU ; Han SHEN ; Wanqing ZHOU ; Wei JIA ; Gang LI ; Jinsong WU ; Yuemei LU ; Jihong LI ; Jinju DUAN ; Jianbang KANG ; Xiaobo MA ; Yanping ZHENG ; Ruyi GUO ; Yan ZHU ; Yunsheng CHEN ; Qing MENG ; Shifu WANG ; Xuefei HU ; Jilu SHEN ; Ruizhong WANG ; Hua FANG ; Bixia YU ; Yong ZHAO ; Ping GONG ; Kaizhen WENG ; Yirong ZHANG ; Jiangshan LIU ; Longfeng LIAO ; Hongqin GU ; Lin JIANG ; Wen HE ; Shunhong XUE ; Jiao FENG ; Chunlei YUE
Chinese Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy 2024;24(3):287-299
Objective To investigate the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profiles of the common pathogens isolated from urine from 2015 to 2021 in the CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program.Methods The bacterial strains were isolated from urine and identified routinely in 51 hospitals across China in the CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program from 2015 to 2021.Antimicrobial susceptibility was determined by Kirby-Bauer method,automatic microbiological analysis system and E-test according to the unified protocol.Results A total of 261 893 nonduplicate strains were isolated from urine specimen from 2015 to 2021,of which gram-positive bacteria accounted for 23.8%(62 219/261 893),and gram-negative bacteria 76.2%(199 674/261 893).The most common species were E.coli(46.7%),E.faecium(10.4%),K.pneumoniae(9.8%),E.faecalis(8.7%),P.mirabilis(3.5%),P.aeruginosa(3.4%),SS.agalactiae(2.6%),and E.cloacae(2.1%).The strains were more frequently isolated from inpatients versus outpatients and emergency patients,from females versus males,and from adults versus children.The prevalence of ESBLs-producing strains in E.coli,K.pneumoniae and P.mirabilis was 53.2%,52.8%and 37.0%,respectively.The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant strains in E.coli,K.pneumoniae,P.aeruginosa and A.baumannii was 1.7%,18.5%,16.4%,and 40.3%,respectively.Lower than 10%of the E.faecalis isolates were resistant to ampicillin,nitrofurantoin,linezolid,vancomycin,teicoplanin and fosfomycin.More than 90%of the E.faecium isolates were ressitant to ampicillin,levofloxacin and erythromycin.The percentage of strains resistant to vancomycin,linezolid or teicoplanin was<2%.The E.coli,K.pneumoniae,P.aeruginosa and A.baumannii strains isolated from ICU inpatients showed significantly higher resistance rates than the corresponding strains isolated from outpatients and non-ICU inpatients.Conclusions E.coli,Enterococcus and K.pneumoniae are the most common pathogens in urinary tract infection.The bacterial species and antimicrobial resistance of urinary isolates vary with different populations.More attention should be paid to antimicrobial resistance surveillance and reduce the irrational use of antimicrobial agents.
9.Changing resistance profiles of Enterococcus in hospitals across China:results from the CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program,2015-2021
Na CHEN ; Ping JI ; Yang YANG ; Fupin HU ; Demei ZHU ; Yingchun XU ; Xiaojiang ZHANG ; Yi XIE ; Mei KANG ; Chuanqing WANG ; Pan FU ; Yuanhong XU ; Ying HUANG ; Ziyong SUN ; Zhongju CHEN ; Yuxing NI ; Jingyong SUN ; Yunzhuo CHU ; Sufei TIAN ; Zhidong HU ; Jin LI ; Yunsong YU ; Jie LIN ; Bin SHAN ; Yan DU ; Sufang GUO ; Lianhua WEI ; Fengmei ZOU ; Hong ZHANG ; Chun WANG ; Yunjian HU ; Xiaoman AI ; Chao ZHUO ; Danhong SU ; Dawen GUO ; Jinying ZHAO ; Hua YU ; Xiangning HUANG ; Wen'en LIU ; Yanming LI ; Yan JIN ; Chunhong SHAO ; Xuesong XU ; Chao YAN ; Shanmei WANG ; Yafei CHU ; Lixia ZHANG ; Juan MA ; Shuping ZHOU ; Yan ZHOU ; Lei ZHU ; Jinhua MENG ; Fang DONG ; Zhiyong LÜ ; Fangfang HU ; Han SHEN ; Wanqing ZHOU ; Wei JIA ; Gang LI ; Jinsong WU ; Yuemei LU ; Jihong LI ; Jinju DUAN ; Jianbang KANG ; Xiaobo MA ; Yanping ZHENG ; Ruyi GUO ; Yan ZHU ; Yunsheng CHEN ; Qing MENG ; Shifu WANG ; Xuefei HU ; Jilu SHEN ; Ruizhong WANG ; Hua FANG ; Bixia YU ; Yong ZHAO ; Ping GONG ; Kaizhen WEN ; Yirong ZHANG ; Jiangshan LIU ; Longfeng LIAO ; Hongqin GU ; Lin JIANG ; Wen HE ; Shunhong XUE ; Jiao FENG ; Chunlei YUE
Chinese Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy 2024;24(3):300-308
Objective To understand the distribution and changing resistance profiles of clinical isolates of Enterococcus in hospitals across China from 2015 to 2021.Methods Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was conducted for the clinical isolates of Enterococcus according to the unified protocol of CHINET program by automated systems,Kirby-Bauer method,or E-test strip.The results were interpreted according to the Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI)breakpoints in 2021.WHONET 5.6 software was used for statistical analysis.Results A total of 124 565 strains of Enterococcus were isolated during the 7-year period,mainly including Enterococcus faecalis(50.7%)and Enterococcus faecalis(41.5%).The strains were mainly isolated from urinary tract specimens(46.9%±2.6%),and primarily from the patients in the department of internal medicine,surgery and ICU.E.faecium and E.faecalis strains showed low level resistance rate to vancomycin,teicoplanin and linezolid(≤3.6%).The prevalence of vancomycin-resistant E.faecalis and E.faecium was 0.1%and 1.3%,respectively.The prevalence of linezolid-resistant E.faecalis increased from 0.7%in 2015 to 3.4%in 2021,while the prevalence of linezolid-resistant E.faecium was 0.3%.Conclusions The clinical isolates of Enterococcus were still highly susceptible to vancomycin,teicoplanin,and linezolid,evidenced by a low resistance rate.However,the prevalence of linezolid-resistant E.faecalis was increasing during the 7-year period.It is necessary to strengthen antimicrobial resistance surveillance to effectively identify the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and curb the spread of resistant pathogens.
10.Changing resistance profiles of Enterobacter isolates in hospitals across China:results from the CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program,2015-2021
Shaozhen YAN ; Ziyong SUN ; Zhongju CHEN ; Yang YANG ; Fupin HU ; Demei ZHU ; Yi XIE ; Mei KANG ; Fengbo ZHANG ; Ping JI ; Zhidong HU ; Jin LI ; Sufang GUO ; Han SHEN ; Wanqing ZHOU ; Yingchun XU ; Xiaojiang ZHANG ; Xuesong XU ; Chao YAN ; Chuanqing WANG ; Pan FU ; Wei JIA ; Gang LI ; Yuanhong XU ; Ying HUANG ; Dawen GUO ; Jinying ZHAO ; Wen'en LIU ; Yanming LI ; Hua YU ; Xiangning HUANG ; Bin SHAN ; Yan DU ; Shanmei WANG ; Yafei CHU ; Yuxing NI ; Jingyong SUN ; Yunsong YU ; Jie LIN ; Chao ZHUO ; Danhong SU ; Lianhua WEI ; Fengmei ZOU ; Yan JIN ; Chunhong SHAO ; Jihong LI ; Lixia ZHANG ; Juan MA ; Yunzhuo CHU ; Sufei TIAN ; Jinju DUAN ; Jianbang KANG ; Ruizhong WANG ; Hua FANG ; Fangfang HU ; Yunjian HU ; Xiaoman AI ; Fang DONG ; Zhiyong LÜ ; Hong ZHANG ; Chun WANG ; Yong ZHAO ; Ping GONG ; Lei ZHU ; Jinhua MENG ; Xiaobo MA ; Yanping ZHENG ; Jinsong WU ; Yuemei LU ; Ruyi GUO ; Yan ZHU ; Kaizhen WEN ; Yirong ZHANG ; Chunlei YUE ; Jiangshan LIU ; Wenhui HUANG ; Shunhong XUE ; Xuefei HU ; Hongqin GU ; Jiao FENG ; Shuping ZHOU ; Yan ZHOU ; Yunsheng CHEN ; Qing MENG ; Bixia YU ; Jilu SHEN ; Rui DOU ; Shifu WANG ; Wen HE ; Longfeng LIAO ; Lin JIANG
Chinese Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy 2024;24(3):309-317
Objective To examine the changing antimicrobial resistance profile of Enterobacter spp.isolates in 53 hospitals across China from 2015 t0 2021.Methods The clinical isolates of Enterobacter spp.were collected from 53 hospitals across China during 2015-2021 and tested for antimicrobial susceptibility using Kirby-Bauer method or automated testing systems according to the CHINET unified protocol.The results were interpreted according to the breakpoints issued by the Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI)in 2021(M100 31st edition)and analyzed with WHONET 5.6 software.Results A total of 37 966 Enterobacter strains were isolated from 2015 to 2021.The proportion of Enterobacter isolates among all clinical isolates showed a fluctuating trend over the 7-year period,overall 2.5%in all clinical isolates amd 5.7%in Enterobacterale strains.The most frequently isolated Enterobacter species was Enterobacter cloacae,accounting for 93.7%(35 571/37 966).The strains were mainly isolated from respiratory specimens(44.4±4.6)%,followed by secretions/pus(16.4±2.3)%and urine(16.0±0.9)%.The strains from respiratory samples decreased slightly,while those from sterile body fluids increased over the 7-year period.The Enterobacter strains were mainly isolated from inpatients(92.9%),and only(7.1±0.8)%of the strains were isolated from outpatients and emergency patients.The patients in surgical wards contributed the highest number of isolates(24.4±2.9)%compared to the inpatients in any other departement.Overall,≤ 7.9%of the E.cloacae strains were resistant to amikacin,tigecycline,polymyxin B,imipenem or meropenem,while ≤5.6%of the Enterobacter asburiae strains were resistant to these antimicrobial agents.E.asburiae showed higher resistance rate to polymyxin B than E.cloacae(19.7%vs 3.9%).Overall,≤8.1%of the Enterobacter gergoviae strains were resistant to tigecycline,amikacin,meropenem,or imipenem,while 10.5%of these strains were resistant to polycolistin B.The overall prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacter was 10.0%over the 7-year period,but showing an upward trend.The resistance profiles of Enterobacter isolates varied with the department from which they were isolated and whether the patient is an adult or a child.The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant E.cloacae was the highest in the E.cloacae isolates from ICU patients.Conclusions The results of the CHINET Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Program indicate that the proportion of Enterobacter strains in all clinical isolates fluctuates slightly over the 7-year period from 2015 to 2021.The Enterobacter strains showed increasing resistance to multiple antimicrobial drugs,especially carbapenems over the 7-year period.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail