1.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report 2023: Gram-positive bacteria
Chaoqun YING ; Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Hui DING ; Yanyan LI ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Haifeng MAO ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Lu WANG ; Yongyun LIU ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Donghong HUANG ; Hongyun XU ; Peng ZHANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Hong HE ; Lin ZHENG ; Junmin CAO ; Zhou LIU ; Ying HUANG ; Yan GENG ; Haiquan KANG ; Dan LIU ; Guolin LIAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Yanhong LI ; Baohua ZHANG ; Haixin DONG ; Xiaoyan LI ; Donghua LIU ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Xuefei HU ; Liang GUO ; Sijin MAN ; Dijing SONG ; Rong XU ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Aiyun LI ; Zhuo LI ; Hongxia HU ; Guoping LU ; Jinhua LIANG ; Qiang LIU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Jilu SHEN ; Shuyan HU ; Liang LUAN ; Jian LI ; Ling MENG ; Dengyan QIAO ; Xiusan XIA ; Bo QUAN ; Dahong WANG ; Chunhua HAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Fei LI ; Shifu WANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yunbo CHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2025;18(2):118-132
Objective:To report the nationwide surveillance results of pathogenic profiles and antimicrobial resistance patterns of Gram-positive bloodstream infections in China in 2023.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-posttive bacteria from blood cultures were collected in member hospitals of National Bloodstream Infection Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System(BRICS)during January to December 2023. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the dilution method recommended by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). Statistical analyses were conducted using WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 software.Results:A total of 4 385 Gram-positive bacterial isolates were obtained from 60 participating center. The top five pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus( n=1 544,35.2%),coagulase-negative Staphylococci( n=1 441,32.9%), Enterococcus faecium( n=574,13.1%), Enterococcus faecalis( n=385,8.8%),and α-hemolytic Streptococci( n=187,4.3%). The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA)and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci(MRCNS)was 26.2%(405/1 544)and 69.8%(1 006/1 441),respectively. Notably,all Staphylococci remained susceptible to glycopeptide or daptomycin. Staphylococcus aureus demonstrated excellent susceptibility(>97.0%)to cephalobiol,rifampicin,trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole,linezolid,minocycline,tigecycline,and eravacycline. No Enterococcus exhibiting resistance to linezolid were detected. Glycopeptide resistance was uncommon but more frequent in Enterococcus faecium(resistance to vancomycin and teicoplanin:both 1.7%)compared to Enterococcus faecalis(both 0.3%). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS exhibited significant regional variations across the country( χ2=17.674 and 148.650,respectively,both P<0.001). No vancomycin-resistant Enterococci were detected in central China. Institutional comparison demonstrated higher prevalence of MRSA( χ2=14.111, P<0.001)and MRCNS( χ2=4.828, P=0.028)in provincial hospitals than that in municipal hospitals. Socioeconomic analysis identified elevated detection rates of both MRSA( χ2=18.986, P<0.001)and MRCNS( χ2=4.477, P=0.034)in less developed regions(per capita GDP
2.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report (2023) : Gram-negative bacteria
Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Chaoqun YING ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Hui DING ; Yanyan LI ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Haifeng MAO ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Lu WANG ; Yongyun LIU ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Donghong HUANG ; Hongyun XU ; Peng ZHANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Hong HE ; Lin ZHENG ; Junmin CAO ; Zhou LIU ; Ying HUANG ; Yan GENG ; Haiquan KANG ; Dan LIU ; Guolin LIAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Yanhong LI ; Baohua ZHANG ; Haixin DONG ; Xiaoyan LI ; Donghua LIU ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Xuefei HU ; Liang GUO ; Sijin MAN ; Dijing SONG ; Rong XU ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Aiyun LI ; Zhuo LI ; Hongxia HU ; Guoping LU ; Jinhua LIANG ; Qiang LIU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Jilu SHEN ; Shuyan HU ; Liang LUAN ; Jian LI ; Ling MENG ; Dengyan QIAO ; Xiusan XIA ; Bo QUAN ; Dahong WANG ; Chunhua HAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Fei LI ; Shifu WANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yunbo CHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2025;18(1):47-62
Objective:To report the results of bacterial resistant investigation collaborative system(BRICS)on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-negative bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2023,and provide reference for clinical tretment of bloodstream infections and prevention and control of bacterial resistance.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-negative bacteria from blood cultures in member hospitals of BRICS were collected during January 2023 to December 2023. 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 were used to analyze the data.Results:During the study period,11 492 strains of Gram-negative bacteria were collected from 60 hospitals,of which 10 098(87.9%)were Enterobacterales and 1 394(12.1%)were non-fermentative bacteria. The top 5 bacterial species were Escherichia coli(50.0%), Klebsiella pneumoniae(26.1%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa(5.1%), Acinetobacter baumannii complex(5.0%)and Enterobacter cloacae complex(4.1%). The ESBL-producing rates in Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirablilis were 46.8%(2 685/5 741),18.3%(549/2 999)and 44.0%(77/175),respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli(CREC)and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae(CRKP)were 1.3%(76/5 741)and 15.0%(450/2 999);32.9%(25/76)and 78.0%(351/450)of CREC and CRKP were sensitive to ceftazidime/avibactam combination,respectively. 94.7%(72/76)and 90.2%(406/450)of CREC and CRKP were sensitive to aztreonam/avibactam combination. Furthermore,57.9%(44/76)and 79.1%(356/450)were sensitive to imipenem/relebactam combination. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii(CRAB)complex was 64.6%(370/573),while more than 80.0% of CRAB complex was sensitive to tigecycline,eravacycline and polymyxin B. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa(CRPA)was 17.0%(99/581). There were differences in the composition ratio of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections and the prevalence of important Gram-negative bacteria resistance among different regions in China,with statistically significant differences in the prevalence of CREC,CRKP,CRPA and CRAB complex( χ2=10.6,28.6,10.8 and 19.3, P<0.05). The prevalence of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli, CREC,CRAB complex and CRKP were higher in provincial hospitals than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=12.5,9.8,12.7 and 57.8,all P<0.01). Conclusions:Gram-negative bacteria are the main pathogens causing bloodstream infections in China,and Escherichia coli is ranked in the top,while the trend of Klebsiella pneumoniae increases continuously with time. CRKP infection shows a slow upward trend,CREC infecton maintains a low prevalence level,and CRAB complex infection continues to exhibit a high prevalence rate. The composition and resistance patterns of pathogens causing bloodstream infections vary to some extent across different regions and levels of hospitals in China.
3.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report 2023: Gram-positive bacteria
Chaoqun YING ; Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Hui DING ; Yanyan LI ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Haifeng MAO ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Lu WANG ; Yongyun LIU ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Donghong HUANG ; Hongyun XU ; Peng ZHANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Hong HE ; Lin ZHENG ; Junmin CAO ; Zhou LIU ; Ying HUANG ; Yan GENG ; Haiquan KANG ; Dan LIU ; Guolin LIAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Yanhong LI ; Baohua ZHANG ; Haixin DONG ; Xiaoyan LI ; Donghua LIU ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Xuefei HU ; Liang GUO ; Sijin MAN ; Dijing SONG ; Rong XU ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Aiyun LI ; Zhuo LI ; Hongxia HU ; Guoping LU ; Jinhua LIANG ; Qiang LIU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Jilu SHEN ; Shuyan HU ; Liang LUAN ; Jian LI ; Ling MENG ; Dengyan QIAO ; Xiusan XIA ; Bo QUAN ; Dahong WANG ; Chunhua HAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Fei LI ; Shifu WANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yunbo CHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2025;18(2):118-132
Objective:To report the nationwide surveillance results of pathogenic profiles and antimicrobial resistance patterns of Gram-positive bloodstream infections in China in 2023.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-posttive bacteria from blood cultures were collected in member hospitals of National Bloodstream Infection Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System(BRICS)during January to December 2023. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the dilution method recommended by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). Statistical analyses were conducted using WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 software.Results:A total of 4 385 Gram-positive bacterial isolates were obtained from 60 participating center. The top five pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus( n=1 544,35.2%),coagulase-negative Staphylococci( n=1 441,32.9%), Enterococcus faecium( n=574,13.1%), Enterococcus faecalis( n=385,8.8%),and α-hemolytic Streptococci( n=187,4.3%). The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA)and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci(MRCNS)was 26.2%(405/1 544)and 69.8%(1 006/1 441),respectively. Notably,all Staphylococci remained susceptible to glycopeptide or daptomycin. Staphylococcus aureus demonstrated excellent susceptibility(>97.0%)to cephalobiol,rifampicin,trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole,linezolid,minocycline,tigecycline,and eravacycline. No Enterococcus exhibiting resistance to linezolid were detected. Glycopeptide resistance was uncommon but more frequent in Enterococcus faecium(resistance to vancomycin and teicoplanin:both 1.7%)compared to Enterococcus faecalis(both 0.3%). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS exhibited significant regional variations across the country( χ2=17.674 and 148.650,respectively,both P<0.001). No vancomycin-resistant Enterococci were detected in central China. Institutional comparison demonstrated higher prevalence of MRSA( χ2=14.111, P<0.001)and MRCNS( χ2=4.828, P=0.028)in provincial hospitals than that in municipal hospitals. Socioeconomic analysis identified elevated detection rates of both MRSA( χ2=18.986, P<0.001)and MRCNS( χ2=4.477, P=0.034)in less developed regions(per capita GDP
4.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report (2023) : Gram-negative bacteria
Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Chaoqun YING ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Hui DING ; Yanyan LI ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Haifeng MAO ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Lu WANG ; Yongyun LIU ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Donghong HUANG ; Hongyun XU ; Peng ZHANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Hong HE ; Lin ZHENG ; Junmin CAO ; Zhou LIU ; Ying HUANG ; Yan GENG ; Haiquan KANG ; Dan LIU ; Guolin LIAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Yanhong LI ; Baohua ZHANG ; Haixin DONG ; Xiaoyan LI ; Donghua LIU ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Xuefei HU ; Liang GUO ; Sijin MAN ; Dijing SONG ; Rong XU ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Aiyun LI ; Zhuo LI ; Hongxia HU ; Guoping LU ; Jinhua LIANG ; Qiang LIU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Jilu SHEN ; Shuyan HU ; Liang LUAN ; Jian LI ; Ling MENG ; Dengyan QIAO ; Xiusan XIA ; Bo QUAN ; Dahong WANG ; Chunhua HAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Fei LI ; Shifu WANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yunbo CHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2025;18(1):47-62
Objective:To report the results of bacterial resistant investigation collaborative system(BRICS)on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-negative bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2023,and provide reference for clinical tretment of bloodstream infections and prevention and control of bacterial resistance.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-negative bacteria from blood cultures in member hospitals of BRICS were collected during January 2023 to December 2023. 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 were used to analyze the data.Results:During the study period,11 492 strains of Gram-negative bacteria were collected from 60 hospitals,of which 10 098(87.9%)were Enterobacterales and 1 394(12.1%)were non-fermentative bacteria. The top 5 bacterial species were Escherichia coli(50.0%), Klebsiella pneumoniae(26.1%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa(5.1%), Acinetobacter baumannii complex(5.0%)and Enterobacter cloacae complex(4.1%). The ESBL-producing rates in Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirablilis were 46.8%(2 685/5 741),18.3%(549/2 999)and 44.0%(77/175),respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli(CREC)and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae(CRKP)were 1.3%(76/5 741)and 15.0%(450/2 999);32.9%(25/76)and 78.0%(351/450)of CREC and CRKP were sensitive to ceftazidime/avibactam combination,respectively. 94.7%(72/76)and 90.2%(406/450)of CREC and CRKP were sensitive to aztreonam/avibactam combination. Furthermore,57.9%(44/76)and 79.1%(356/450)were sensitive to imipenem/relebactam combination. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii(CRAB)complex was 64.6%(370/573),while more than 80.0% of CRAB complex was sensitive to tigecycline,eravacycline and polymyxin B. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa(CRPA)was 17.0%(99/581). There were differences in the composition ratio of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections and the prevalence of important Gram-negative bacteria resistance among different regions in China,with statistically significant differences in the prevalence of CREC,CRKP,CRPA and CRAB complex( χ2=10.6,28.6,10.8 and 19.3, P<0.05). The prevalence of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli, CREC,CRAB complex and CRKP were higher in provincial hospitals than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=12.5,9.8,12.7 and 57.8,all P<0.01). Conclusions:Gram-negative bacteria are the main pathogens causing bloodstream infections in China,and Escherichia coli is ranked in the top,while the trend of Klebsiella pneumoniae increases continuously with time. CRKP infection shows a slow upward trend,CREC infecton maintains a low prevalence level,and CRAB complex infection continues to exhibit a high prevalence rate. The composition and resistance patterns of pathogens causing bloodstream infections vary to some extent across different regions and levels of hospitals in China.
5.Expert consensus on clinical application of 177Lu-prostate specific membrane antigen radio-ligand therapy in prostate cancer
Guobing LIU ; Weihai ZHUO ; Yushen GU ; Zhi YANG ; Yue CHEN ; Wei FAN ; Jianming GUO ; Jian TAN ; Xiaohua ZHU ; Li HUO ; Xiaoli LAN ; Biao LI ; Weibing MIAO ; Shaoli SONG ; Hao XU ; Rong TIAN ; Quanyong LUO ; Feng WANG ; Xuemei WANG ; Aimin YANG ; Dong DAI ; Zhiyong DENG ; Jinhua ZHAO ; Xiaoliang CHEN ; Yan FAN ; Zairong GAO ; Xingmin HAN ; Ningyi JIANG ; Anren KUANG ; Yansong LIN ; Fugeng LIU ; Cen LOU ; Xinhui SU ; Lijun TANG ; Hui WANG ; Xinlu WANG ; Fuzhou YANG ; Hui YANG ; Xinming ZHAO ; Bo YANG ; Xiaodong HUANG ; Jiliang CHEN ; Sijin LI ; Jing WANG ; Yaming LI ; Hongcheng SHI
Chinese Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024;31(5):844-850,封3
177Lu-prostate specific membrane antigen(PSMA)radio-ligand therapy has been approved abroad for advanced prostate cancer and has been in several clinical trials in China.Based on domestic clinical practice and experimental data and referred to international experience and viewpoints,the expert group forms a consensus on the clinical application of 177Lu-PSMA radio-ligand therapy in prostate cancer to guide clinical practice.
6.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report (2022) : Gram-negative bacteria
Zhiying LIU ; Yunbo CHEN ; Jinru JI ; Chaoqun YING ; 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(1):42-57
Objective:To report the results of national surveillance on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-negative bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2022.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-negative 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:During the study period,9 035 strains of Gram-negative bacteria were collected from 51 hospitals,of which 7 895(87.4%)were Enterobacteriaceae and 1 140(12.6%)were non-fermenting bacteria. The top 5 bacterial species were Escherichia coli( n=4 510,49.9%), Klebsiella pneumoniae( n=2 340,25.9%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa( n=534,5.9%), Acinetobacter baumannii complex( n=405,4.5%)and Enterobacter cloacae( n=327,3.6%). The ESBLs-producing rates in Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus spp. were 47.1%(2 095/4 452),21.0%(427/2 033)and 41.1%(58/141),respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli(CREC)and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae(CRKP)were 1.3%(58/4 510)and 13.1%(307/2 340);62.1%(36/58)and 9.8%(30/307)of CREC and CRKP were resistant to ceftazidime/avibactam combination,respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii(CRAB)complex was 59.5%(241/405),while less than 5% of Acinetobacter baumannii complex was resistant to tigecycline and polymyxin B. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa(CRPA)was 18.4%(98/534). There were differences in the composition ratio of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections and the prevalence of main Gram-negative bacteria resistance among different regions,with statistically significant differences in the prevalence of CRKP and CRPA( χ2=20.489 and 20.252, P<0.001). The prevalence of CREC,CRKP,CRPA,CRAB,ESBLs-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were higher in provinicial hospitals than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=11.953,81.183,10.404,5.915,12.415 and 6.459, P<0.01 or <0.05),while the prevalence of CRPA was higher in economically developed regions(per capita GDP ≥ 92 059 Yuan)than that in economically less-developed regions(per capita GDP <92 059 Yuan)( χ2=6.240, P=0.012). Conclusions:The proportion of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections shows an increasing trend,and Escherichia coli is ranked in the top,while the trend of CRKP decreases continuously with time. Decreasing trends are noted in ESBLs-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Low prevalence of carbapenem resistance in Escherichia coli and high prevalence in CRAB complex have been observed. The composition ratio and antibacterial spectrum of bloodstream infections in different regions of China are slightly different,and the proportion of main drug resistant bacteria in provincial hospitals is higher than those in municipal hospitals.
7.Chinese expert consensus on blood support mode and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma patients (version 2024)
Yao LU ; Yang LI ; Leiying ZHANG ; Hao TANG ; Huidan JING ; Yaoli WANG ; Xiangzhi JIA ; Li BA ; Maohong BIAN ; Dan CAI ; Hui CAI ; Xiaohong CAI ; Zhanshan ZHA ; Bingyu CHEN ; Daqing CHEN ; Feng CHEN ; Guoan CHEN ; Haiming CHEN ; Jing CHEN ; Min CHEN ; Qing CHEN ; Shu CHEN ; Xi CHEN ; Jinfeng CHENG ; Xiaoling CHU ; Hongwang CUI ; Xin CUI ; Zhen DA ; Ying DAI ; Surong DENG ; Weiqun DONG ; Weimin FAN ; Ke FENG ; Danhui FU ; Yongshui FU ; Qi FU ; Xuemei FU ; Jia GAN ; Xinyu GAN ; Wei GAO ; Huaizheng GONG ; Rong GUI ; Geng GUO ; Ning HAN ; Yiwen HAO ; Wubing HE ; Qiang HONG ; Ruiqin HOU ; Wei HOU ; Jie HU ; Peiyang HU ; Xi HU ; Xiaoyu HU ; Guangbin HUANG ; Jie HUANG ; Xiangyan HUANG ; Yuanshuai HUANG ; Shouyong HUN ; Xuebing JIANG ; Ping JIN ; Dong LAI ; Aiping LE ; Hongmei LI ; Bijuan LI ; Cuiying LI ; Daihong LI ; Haihong LI ; He LI ; Hui LI ; Jianping LI ; Ning LI ; Xiying LI ; Xiangmin LI ; Xiaofei LI ; Xiaojuan LI ; Zhiqiang LI ; Zhongjun LI ; Zunyan LI ; Huaqin LIANG ; Xiaohua LIANG ; Dongfa LIAO ; Qun LIAO ; Yan LIAO ; Jiajin LIN ; Chunxia LIU ; Fenghua LIU ; Peixian LIU ; Tiemei LIU ; Xiaoxin LIU ; Zhiwei LIU ; Zhongdi LIU ; Hua LU ; Jianfeng LUAN ; Jianjun LUO ; Qun LUO ; Dingfeng LYU ; Qi LYU ; Xianping LYU ; Aijun MA ; Liqiang MA ; Shuxuan MA ; Xainjun MA ; Xiaogang MA ; Xiaoli MA ; Guoqing MAO ; Shijie MU ; Shaolin NIE ; Shujuan OUYANG ; Xilin OUYANG ; Chunqiu PAN ; Jian PAN ; Xiaohua PAN ; Lei PENG ; Tao PENG ; Baohua QIAN ; Shu QIAO ; Li QIN ; Ying REN ; Zhaoqi REN ; Ruiming RONG ; Changshan SU ; Mingwei SUN ; Wenwu SUN ; Zhenwei SUN ; Haiping TANG ; Xiaofeng TANG ; Changjiu TANG ; Cuihua TAO ; Zhibin TIAN ; Juan WANG ; Baoyan WANG ; Chunyan WANG ; Gefei WANG ; Haiyan WANG ; Hongjie WANG ; Peng WANG ; Pengli WANG ; Qiushi WANG ; Xiaoning WANG ; Xinhua WANG ; Xuefeng WANG ; Yong WANG ; Yongjun WANG ; Yuanjie WANG ; Zhihua WANG ; Shaojun WEI ; Yaming WEI ; Jianbo WEN ; Jun WEN ; Jiang WU ; Jufeng WU ; Aijun XIA ; Fei XIA ; Rong XIA ; Jue XIE ; Yanchao XING ; Yan XIONG ; Feng XU ; Yongzhu XU ; Yongan XU ; Yonghe YAN ; Beizhan YAN ; Jiang YANG ; Jiangcun YANG ; Jun YANG ; Xinwen YANG ; Yongyi YANG ; Chunyan YAO ; Mingliang YE ; Changlin YIN ; Ming YIN ; Wen YIN ; Lianling YU ; Shuhong YU ; Zebo YU ; Yigang YU ; Anyong YU ; Hong YUAN ; Yi YUAN ; Chan ZHANG ; Jinjun ZHANG ; Jun ZHANG ; Kai ZHANG ; Leibing ZHANG ; Quan ZHANG ; Rongjiang ZHANG ; Sanming ZHANG ; Shengji ZHANG ; Shuo ZHANG ; Wei ZHANG ; Weidong ZHANG ; Xi ZHANG ; Xingwen ZHANG ; Guixi ZHANG ; Xiaojun ZHANG ; Guoqing ZHAO ; Jianpeng ZHAO ; Shuming ZHAO ; Beibei ZHENG ; Shangen ZHENG ; Huayou ZHOU ; Jicheng ZHOU ; Lihong ZHOU ; Mou ZHOU ; Xiaoyu ZHOU ; Xuelian ZHOU ; Yuan ZHOU ; Zheng ZHOU ; Zuhuang ZHOU ; Haiyan ZHU ; Peiyuan ZHU ; Changju ZHU ; Lili ZHU ; Zhengguo WANG ; Jianxin JIANG ; Deqing WANG ; Jiongcai LAN ; Quanli WANG ; Yang YU ; Lianyang ZHANG ; Aiqing WEN
Chinese Journal of Trauma 2024;40(10):865-881
Patients with severe trauma require an extremely timely treatment and transfusion plays an irreplaceable role in the emergency treatment of such patients. An increasing number of evidence-based medicinal evidences and clinical practices suggest that patients with severe traumatic bleeding benefit from early transfusion of low-titer group O whole blood or hemostatic resuscitation with red blood cells, plasma and platelet of a balanced ratio. However, the current domestic mode of blood supply cannot fully meet the requirements of timely and effective blood transfusion for emergency treatment of patients with severe trauma in clinical practice. In order to solve the key problems in blood supply and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma, Branch of Clinical Transfusion Medicine of Chinese Medical Association, Group for Trauma Emergency Care and Multiple Injuries of Trauma Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Young Scholar Group of Disaster Medicine Branch of Chinese Medical Association organized domestic experts of blood transfusion medicine and trauma treatment to jointly formulate Chinese expert consensus on blood support mode and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma patients ( version 2024). Based on the evidence-based medical evidence and Delphi method of expert consultation and voting, 10 recommendations were put forward from two aspects of blood support mode and transfusion strategies, aiming to provide a reference for transfusion resuscitation in the emergency treatment of severe trauma and further improve the success rate of treatment of patients with severe trauma.
8.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.
9.A multicenter study on effect of delayed chemotherapy on prognosis of Burkitt lymphoma in children
Li SONG ; Ling JIN ; Yonghong ZHANG ; Xiaomei YANG ; Yanlong DUAN ; Mincui ZHENG ; Xiaowen ZHAI ; Ying LIU ; Wei LIU ; Ansheng LIU ; Xiaojun YUAN ; Yunpeng DAI ; Leping ZHANG ; Jian WANG ; Lirong SUN ; Rong LIU ; Baoxi ZHANG ; Lian JIANG ; Huixia WEI ; Kailan CHEN ; Runming JIN ; Xige WANG ; Haixia ZHOU ; Hongmei WANG ; Shushuan ZHUANG ; Chunju ZHOU ; Zifen GAO ; Xiao MU ; Kaihui ZHANG ; Fu LI
Chinese Journal of Pediatrics 2024;62(10):941-948
Objective:To analyze the factors affecting delayed chemotherapy in children with Burkitt lymphoma (BL) and their influence on prognosis.Methods:Retrospective cohort study. Clinical data of 591 children aged ≤18 years with BL from May 2017 to December 2022 in China Net Childhood Lymphoma (CNCL) was collected. The patients were treated according to the protocol CNCL-BL-2017. According to the clinical characteristics, therapeutic regimen was divided into group A, group B and group C .Based on whether the total chemotherapy time was delayed, patients were divided into two groups: the delayed chemotherapy group and the non-delayed chemotherapy group. Based on the total delayed time of chemotherapy, patients in group C were divided into non-delayed chemotherapy group, 1-7 days delayed group and more than 7 days delayed group. Relationships between delayed chemotherapy and gender, age, tumor lysis syndrome before chemotherapy, bone marrow involvement, disease group (B/C group), serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 4 times than normal, grade Ⅲ-Ⅳ myelosuppression after chemotherapy, minimal residual disease in the interim assessment, and severe infection (including severe pneumonia, sepsis, meningitis, chickenpox, etc.) were analyzed. Logistic analysis was used to identify the relevant factors. Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the patients' survival information. Log-Rank was used for comparison between groups.Results:Among 591 patients, 504 were males and 87 were females, the follow-up time was 34.8 (18.6,50.1) months. The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was (92.5±1.1)%,and the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) rate was (90.5±1.2)%. Seventy-three (12.4%) patients were in delayed chemotherapy group and 518 (87.6%) patients were in non-delayed chemotherapy group. The reasons for chemotherapy delay included 72 cases (98.6%) of severe infection, 65 cases (89.0%) of bone marrow suppression, 35 cases (47.9%) of organ dysfunction, 22 cases (30.1%) of tumor lysis syndrome,etc. There were 7 cases of chemotherapy delay in group B, which were seen in COPADM (vincristine+cyclophosphamide+prednisone+daunorubicin+methotrexate+intrathecal injection,4 cases) and CYM (methotrexate+cytarabine+intrathecal injection,3 cases) stages. There were 66 cases of chemotherapy delay in group C, which were common in COPADM (28 cases) and CYVE 1 (low dose cytarabine+high dose cytarabine+etoposide+methotrexate, 12 cases) stages. Multinomial Logistic regression analysis showed that the age over 10 years old ( OR=0.54,95% CI 0.30-0.93), tumor lysis syndrome before chemotherapy ( OR=0.48,95% CI 0.27-0.84) and grade Ⅲ-Ⅳ myelosuppression after chemotherapy ( OR=0.55,95% CI 0.33-0.91)were independent risk factors for chemotherapy delay.The 3-year OS rate and the 3-year EFS rate of children with Burkitt lymphoma in the delayed chemotherapy group were lower than those in the non-delayed chemotherapy group ((79.4±4.9)% vs. (94.2±1.1)%, (80.2±4.8)% vs. (92.0±1.2)%,both P<0.05). The 3-year OS rate of the group C with chemotherapy delay >7 days (42 cases) was lower than that of the group with chemotherapy delay of 1-7 days (22 cases) and the non-delay group (399 cases) ((76.7±6.9)% vs. (81.8±8.2)% vs. (92.7±1.3)%, P=0.002).The 3-year OS rate of the chemotherapy delay group (9 cases) in the COP (vincristine+cyclophosphamide+prednisone) phase was lower than that of the non-chemotherapy delay group (454 cases) ((66.7±15.7)% vs. (91.3±1.4)%, P=0.005). Similarly, the 3-year OS rate of the chemotherapy delay group (11 cases) in the COPADM1 phase was lower than that of the non-chemotherapy delay group (452 cases) ((63.6±14.5)% vs. (91.5±1.3)%, P=0.001). Conclusions:The delayed chemotherapy was related to the age over 10 years old, tumor lysis syndrome before chemotherapy and grade Ⅲ-Ⅳ myelosuppression after chemotherapy in pediatric BL. There is a significant relationship between delayed chemotherapy and prognosis of BL in children.
10.The timing of pericardial drainage catheter removal and restart of the anticoagulation in patients suffered from perioperative pericardial tamponade during atrial fibrillation catheter ablation and uninterrupted dabigatran: Experiences from 20 cases.
Xin ZHAO ; Wen Li DAI ; Xin SU ; Jia Hui WU ; Chang Qi JIA ; Li FENG ; Man NING ; Yan Fei RUAN ; Song ZUO ; Rong HU ; Xin DU ; Jian Zeng DONG ; Chang Sheng MA
Chinese Journal of Cardiology 2023;51(1):45-50
Objective: To investigate the timing of pericardial drainage catheter removal and restart of the anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) suffered from perioperative pericardial tamponade during atrial fibrillation catheter ablation and uninterrupted dabigatran. Methods: A total of 20 patients with pericardial tamponade, who underwent AF catheter ablation with uninterrupted dabigatran in Beijing Anzhen Hospital from January 2019 to August 2021, were included in this retrospective analysis. The clinical characteristics of enrolled patients, information of catheter ablation procedures, pericardial tamponade management, perioperative complications, the timing of pericardial drainage catheter removal and restart of anticoagulation were analyzed. Results: All patients underwent pericardiocentesis and pericardial effusion drainage was successful in all patients. The average drainage volume was (427.8±527.4) ml. Seven cases were treated with idarucizumab, of which 1 patient received surgical repair. The average timing of pericardial drainage catheter removal and restart of anticoagulation in 19 patients without surgical repair was (1.4±0.7) and (0.8±0.4) days, respectively. No new bleeding, embolism and death were reported during hospitalization and within 30 days following hospital discharge. Time of removal of pericardial drainage catheter, restart of anticoagulation and hospital stay were similar between patients treated with idarucizumab or not. Conclusion: It is safe and reasonable to remove pericardial drainage catheter and restart anticoagulation as soon as possible during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with uninterrupted dabigatran independent of the idarucizumab use or not in case of confirmed hemostasis.
Humans
;
Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy*
;
Dabigatran/therapeutic use*
;
Cardiac Tamponade/complications*
;
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use*
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Treatment Outcome
;
Drainage/adverse effects*
;
Catheter Ablation
;
Catheters/adverse effects*

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail