Next Article in Journal
Epidemiological Characteristics, Antibiotic Resistance Patterns and Genomic Analysis of Shigella Isolated in Pudong, Shanghai During 2013–2024
Previous Article in Journal
First Report of Multidrug-Resistant Staphylococcus sciuri Isolated from the Urinary Bladder of a Domestic Rabbit in Romania: A Case Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 14
Issue 11
10.3390/antibiotics14111090
antibiotics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Profile of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units of a Maternal and Child Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

by
Lucas Meneses de Oliveira Villar
1,2,
Natalie Del-Vecchio Lages Costa
1,
Danielle Bonotto Cabral Reis
1,
Adriana Teixeira Reis
1,
Leticia Linhares Braga
1,
Fabíola Cristina de Oliveira Kegele
3,
Maria da Conceição Borges Lopes
3,
Maria Francisca da Silva Neta Soares
3,
Maria Elisabeth Lopes Moreira
4,
Natália Chantal Magalhães da Silva
2,
Leonardo Henrique Ferreira Gomes
4 and
Letícia da Cunha Guida
4,*
1
Comissão de Controle de Infecção Hospitalar (CCIH), Instituto Nacional da Saúde da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira– Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (IFF-FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro 22250-020, Brazil
2
Departamento de Enfermagem Médico Cirúrgica, Escola de Enfermagem Alfredo Pinto, Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (DEMC/EEAP/UNIRIO), Rio de Janeiro 22290-180, Brazil
3
Departamento de Patologia Clínica, Instituto Nacional da Saúde da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira—Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (IFF-FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro 22250-020, Brazil
4
Unidade de Pesquisa Clínica, Instituto Nacional da Saúde da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira—Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (IFF-FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro 22250-020, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2025, 14(11), 1090; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14111090
Submission received: 27 August 2025 / Revised: 22 October 2025 / Accepted: 25 October 2025 / Published: 30 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Antibiotics Use and Antimicrobial Stewardship)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Epidemiological surveillance of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria is a key responsibility of hospital infection control committees (HICC). Active surveillance swabs facilitate the early detection of colonized patients; helping to prevent MDR pathogen transmission in intensive care units. This study aimed to describe antimicrobial resistance profiles of bacterial isolates from clinical samples in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at a maternal and child hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil including patients aged 0–18 years admitted to neonatal (NICU), surgical (SICU), and pediatric (PICU) intensive care units between January and December 2023. A total of 286 positive cultures were analyzed from different sample types including blood, urine, tracheal aspirates, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and catheter tips as well as screening swabs (nasal and rectal) for colonization surveillance. Bacterial isolates were identified and tested for antimicrobial susceptibility following BrCAST (Brazilian Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing) guidelines. Results: Of the 286 cultures, 146 (51%) originated from the NICU, 70 (24%) from the SICU, and 70 (24%) from the PICU. Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) predominated in blood cultures, especially among neonates, while MRSA was found in all nasal swabs. Among the Gram-negative bacteria; Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were the most frequent isolates, with 30–50% resistant to third-generation cephalosporins or carbapenems. ESBL-producing organisms were found in 40% of rectal swabs. Conclusions: The predominance of CoNS in neonatal ICUs and high resistance rates among Gram-negative bacteria highlight the urgent need for continuous microbiological surveillance and antimicrobial stewardship in vulnerable pediatric populations.

1. Introduction

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs)—referred to in Brazil as “infections related to healthcare assistance” (IRAS)—are infections acquired during patient care in hospitals and other healthcare facilities [1,2]. These infections are a significant global public health problem, affecting thousands of patients annually and contributing substantially to patient morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs [3,4]. Much modern medical and surgical care is now delivered in non-acute or ambulatory settings, blurring the traditional boundaries of where HAIs arise [5,6].
It is important to distinguish between colonization and clinical infection. Colonization denotes the presence of a pathogen on or in the patient without causing disease or an immune response [7]. In contrast, infection implies a microbe’s invasion of host tissues with associated inflammation and clinical signs (for example, fever, erythema, or purulent discharge). In intensive care units—and especially in neonatal and pediatric ICUs where children often require invasive procedures and prolonged care—colonization frequently precedes symptomatic infection. Of note, the hands of healthcare personnel are a well-recognized vector for transmission: contaminated hands are a primary route by which organisms spread from patient to patient during routine care [8].
Hospital infection control programs prevent and control HAIs and multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) [9]. Infection control committees (ICCs) in healthcare institutions systematically surveil HAIs and MDROs including collecting, analyzing, and interpreting epidemiological data. Based on these data, ICCs design and implement targeted prevention strategies. For example, active surveillance cultures (screening swabs) may identify asymptomatically colonized patients early [10]. Studies have shown that routine screening and isolating MRSA-colonized patients can reduce the transmission rates in high-risk settings. However, the value of universal screening remains debated, and the indiscriminate use of surveillance cultures has not been universally recommended due to resource and cost concerns. In Brazil, data on MDRO colonization in pediatric, neonatal, and surgical (a subdivision dedicated to neonatal surgical care) ICUs are limited, underscoring the need to define local pathogen profiles [11,12]. Reported MDROs in Brazilian ICU patients include coagulase-negative staphylococci and Staphylococcus aureus among the Gram-positives, and Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Escherichia coli among the Gram-negatives [13].
Understanding the local epidemiology of HAIs is essential to guide infection prevention and empirical therapy. Surveillance data inform appropriate contact precautions and antimicrobial stewardship and help clinicians select empiric antibiotics that cover the most likely resistant pathogens. Indeed, as hospitals strive to improve quality and reduce costs, robust infection control programs are increasingly viewed as critical to preventing infections and curbing the spread of MDROs [14,15].
In this context, the present study aimed to describe the antimicrobial resistance profiles of bacterial isolates obtained from neonatal, neonatal surgical, and pediatric intensive care units at a maternal and child hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to identify the most prevalent multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), and provide data to support targeted infection control interventions and optimize empirical antibiotic therapy for critically ill pediatric patients.

2. Results

A total of 286 positive cultures were obtained: 146 from the clinical-profile neonatal ICU, 70 from the surgical-profile neonatal ICU, and 70 from the pediatric ICU. The distribution of pathogens by sample type is shown in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3. Detailed antimicrobial susceptibility profiles, including specific resistance patterns to β-lactams, aminoglycosides, and carbapenems, are available in the Supplementary Materials (Tables S1–S3).
In the pediatric ICU, the most prevalent pathogens identified in blood cultures were Staphylococcus epidermidis, with seven positive cultures (63.3%), followed by Staphylococcus hominis, with two (18.2%), and Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Burkholderia cepacia complex, with one each (9.1%) (Table 1).
Regarding urine cultures with growth after 48 h of hospitalization, Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most frequently identified organism, with two positive cultures (66.7%), followed by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia with one positive culture (33.3%) (Table 1).
Among the tracheal aspirates, the most common pathogens were Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, each with seven positive cultures (30.4%), followed by Burkholderia cepacia complex with four (17.4%), and Serratia marcescens, Klebsiella oxytoca, Acinetobacter baumannii complex, Staphylococcus aureus, and Enterobacter cloacae were each isolated in one culture (4.3%) (Table 1).
Regarding cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures, only one case of growth yielded Staphylococcus epidermidis (100%) (Table 1).
In terms of colonization, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was identified via nasal swabs in seven cases (100%). Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing organisms were detected in seven rectal swabs, while Pseudomonas aeruginosa was isolated in six rectal swab cultures including strains resistant to cephalosporins and carbapenems. Additionally, one rectal swab grew Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, which was sensitive to sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim (Table S1).
Regarding the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), the most prevalent microorganism identified in positive blood cultures (BC) was Staphylococcus haemolyticus, with eight (34.8%) positive results, followed by Staphylococcus epidermidis with six (26.1%) positive cultures, Staphylococcus aureus with three (13.0%), Enterobacter cloacae with two (8.7%), and Enterococcus faecalis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Serratia marcescens, and Staphylococcus warneri, each with one (4.3%) positive BC (Table 2).
The most frequently identified microorganisms for urine cultures (UCs) with growth after 48 h were Enterobacter cloacae, Enterococcus faecalis, and Klebsiella pneumoniae, each with two (20%) positive cultures. These were followed by Serratia marcescens, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii complex, and Staphylococcus aureus, each with one (10%) positive culture (Table 2).
In tracheal aspirates, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus were each identified in two (28.6%) positive cultures. Acinetobacter baumannii complex, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia were each identified in one (14.3%) positive culture (Table 2).
Eight positive results were observed for the following pathogens in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures: Staphylococcus warneri, Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus lugdunensis, Staphylococcus hominis, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus haemolyticus, each representing one (16.7%) positive culture (Table 2).
In nasal swabs (NS), Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin (MRSA) was identified in all 74 (100%) positive cultures, confirming widespread nasal colonization by this pathogen among the patients admitted to intensive care units (Table 2 and Table S2).
Regarding the surveillance cultures, in rectal swabs (RS), Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most frequently isolated microorganism, with eleven (26.8%) positive results—seven (17.1%) multidrug-sensitive isolates and four (9.7%) resistant to cephalosporins and carbapenems. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing organisms were identified in 30 (73.2%) rectal swabs, indicating a high rate of colonization by resistant Enterobacteriaceae (Table 2 and Table S2).
Concerning colonization, the most prevalent organisms were MRSA, ESBL-producing bacteria, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, with 74, 30, and 11 positive cultures, respectively (Table 2).
Regarding the surgical neonatal intensive care unit (SICU), analysis of positive blood cultures (BC) revealed that the most prevalent microorganisms were Staphylococcus epidermidis, with four (23.5%) positive cultures, followed by Staphylococcus hominis with three (17.6%). Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus haemolyticus, and Staphylococcus aureus each accounted for two (11.8%) positive cultures. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus saprophyticus, Enterobacter cloacae, and Klebsiella aerogenes were each identified in one (5.9%) positive blood culture (Table 3 and Table S3).
About the central catheter tip cultures (CCTCs), only one positive culture was observed for Enterobacter cloacae, and no positive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures were detected (Table 3).
Regarding colonization, the most prevalent microorganisms were ESBL-producing organisms, MRSA, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, with 17, 12, and 7 positive cultures, respectively (Table 3 and Table S3).

3. Discussion

The present study provides a comprehensive overview of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) isolated from neonatal, surgical, and pediatric intensive care units (NICU, SICU, and PICU) at a maternal and child hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), including S. epidermidis, S. hominis, S. haemolyticus, and S. saprophyticus, were the most prevalent microorganisms isolated from the blood cultures, particularly among neonates with central venous catheters. This emphasizes the clinical relevance of CoNS as opportunistic pathogens in intensive care settings, where invasive devices are frequently used.
Consistent with previous national reports, CoNS accounted for the majority of bloodstream infections in our cohort, corroborating data from Brazilian NICUs where they are responsible for 40–60% of late-onset sepsis cases [16]. Historically considered non-pathogenic commensals, CoNS are now recognized for their ability to form biofilms and cause serious infections, particularly in immunocompromised patients and those with indwelling medical devices [17,18,19,20]. Their biofilm-forming capacity enhances virulence by facilitating tissue invasion, adherence to surfaces, and immune evasion [21,22]. Consequently, CoNS have become leading causes of nosocomial infections in NICUs, associated with a spectrum of conditions from conjunctivitis to late-onset sepsis [21,23].
Klebsiella pneumoniae emerged as the most frequently isolated Gram-negative pathogen from central venous catheter cultures. The 73% prevalence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in rectal swabs from the NICU was notably higher than the rates reported in similar pediatric units (30–50%) [1,14,24,25], underscoring the critical need for local epidemiological surveillance. The emergence and spread of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae, particularly KPC-producing K. pneumoniae, represent a major public health concern in Brazilian healthcare facilities [24]. Monitoring local susceptibility patterns using accessible laboratory methods is essential for the early identification of carbapenemase-producing strains and the timely implementation of infection control measures [25].
Pseudomonas aeruginosa also appeared as a clinically important pathogen, especially in patients with prolonged hospitalization, tracheostomies, or mechanical ventilation. This finding aligns with global data highlighting Pseudomonas as a major pathogen in hospital-acquired pneumonia [6,26]. Its intrinsic and acquired resistance to multiple antimicrobial classes facilitates persistence in healthcare environments and the colonization of medical equipment [26,27,28]. Early detection of P. aeruginosa colonization is clinically relevant, as MDRO acquisition frequently occurs within 5–7 days after admission [12], reinforcing the importance of strict admission screening and ongoing microbiological surveillance in pediatric ICUs.
Regarding Staphylococcus aureus, although most isolates remain susceptible to vancomycin [27], the detection of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) in our cohort underscores persistent epidemiological challenges. The universal nasal colonization by MRSA observed in this study contrasts with previously reported rates of 40–70% [28], suggesting strong local transmission dynamics. MRSA is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, emphasizing the need for continuous surveillance and targeted infection prevention strategies [29,30].
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia was also identified as an emerging pathogen, particularly in patients exposed to prolonged hospitalization, catheter use, or tracheostomy. Its multidrug resistance—including resistance to β-lactams, quinolones, and aminoglycosides—combined with its environmental persistence, increases the risk of contamination and nosocomial transmission [30].
An important observation was that most cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) infections occurred in neonates with implanted ventricular shunt systems such as ventriculoperitoneal (VP) or external ventricular drains (EVD). CoNS predominated in these cases, consistent with prior reports highlighting the importance of strict aseptic protocols and device surveillance [1,31].
Overall, our findings provide valuable insight into the local epidemiology of MDROs across neonatal and pediatric intensive care settings. The predominance of CoNS and the high colonization rates of MRSA, ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa emphasize the urgent need for multidisciplinary infection control programs, strict hand hygiene, catheter care protocols, and robust antimicrobial stewardship. Although limited by its retrospective and single-center design, this study reinforces the importance of continuous surveillance and evidence-based interventions to optimize empirical antibiotic therapy in critically ill neonatal and pediatric populations.
This study is limited by its retrospective, single-center design and reliance on infection control committee data, which may affect its generalizability. Nevertheless, our findings support targeted infection control interventions and provide evidence to optimize empirical antibiotic therapy in critically ill pediatric populations.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Study Design and Population

This was a cross-sectional, retrospective, and descriptive study conducted in neonatal, neonatal surgical care, and pediatric intensive care units (ICUs) at a public reference hospital for child and adolescent health in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The study population consisted of hospitalized children aged 0 to 18 years who were admitted to the pediatric and neonatal ICUs between January 2023 and December 2023.

4.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Patients were eligible if they were admitted to either the neonatal or pediatric ICU for more than 48 h and had a previously negative surveillance swab. Patients with known colonization at admission and/or a positive surveillance swab within the first 48 h of hospitalization were excluded.

4.3. Specimen Collection and Categorization

Clinical specimens were obtained to identify multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria. For analytical purposes, specimens were categorized as “secretions”, which included samples from surgical wounds, drains, and operative sites. In addition, swab samples used to assess the antimicrobial resistance profiles of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were collected from multiple anatomical sites including anal, axillary, nasal, oral, oropharyngeal, ostial, bone, rectal, ulcer, and surgical wound sites.

4.4. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing and interpretation followed the guidelines established by BrCAST in 2022 and 2023 [32]. Note: BrCAST is the Brazilian Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, which follows the EUCAST criteria and is the standard officially recommended in Brazil by the Ministry of Health.

4.5. Data Collection and Setting

Data were extracted retrospectively from the infection control committee (ICC) database. The neonatal ICU comprised two distinct units: a clinical care unit with fourteen intensive care beds, eight conventional intermediate care beds (UCINCo), and a surgical unit with six beds. The pediatric ICU had a general profile and included six beds. Data collection was based on medical records, and all information was handled in accordance with the ethical standards.

4.6. Data Analysis

A descriptive statistical analysis was conducted to determine the prevalence and distribution of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial colonization among hospitalized children. Data were entered and organized using Microsoft Excel® (version 2010, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA). Frequencies and proportions were calculated, and the results were presented as absolute numbers and percentages. The findings were summarized in tables for clarity and subsequently compared with data reported in the existing literature to contextualize and interpret the results.

4.7. Ethical Considerations

The study was conducted in compliance with Resolution No. 466/2012 of the Brazilian National Health Council (CNS), which regulates research involving human subjects. The study protocol was submitted to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP) via Plataforma Brasil and received formal approval under protocol number 79553224.7.0000.5269 on 16 May 2024. A waiver of informed consent was requested, as the study relied on ICC data without direct patient contact or exposure to identifiable personal information. All research team members signed a confidentiality agreement to ensure privacy and data protection.

5. Conclusions

Understanding the antimicrobial resistance profiles of hospital-acquired pathogens is essential for establishing an effective microbiological surveillance system and guiding empirical therapy in healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). In our study, coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) were the most prevalent pathogens in neonatal and pediatric ICUs, and multidrug-resistant organisms such as MRSA, ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were also frequently identified. Patients in intensive care settings are particularly vulnerable to late-onset infections due to the frequent use of invasive medical devices and broad-spectrum antibiotics, factors that contribute to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance. Collaboration between infection control committees and multidisciplinary healthcare teams is fundamental to prevent infections and reduce the spread of resistant pathogens. Strengthening microbiological surveillance, promoting rational antibiotic use, and implementing antimicrobial stewardship programs remain critical measures to improve outcomes for critically ill pediatric patients. This study is limited by its retrospective, single-center design and reliance on existing infection control committee data, which may affect the generalizability of the findings; nevertheless, it provides valuable insights to guide local infection prevention strategies and optimize empirical therapy.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics14111090/s1, Table S1. Detailed antimicrobial susceptibility profiles—NICU; Table S2. Detailed antimicrobial susceptibility profiles—SICU; Table S3. Detailed antimicrobial susceptibility profiles—PICU.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.H.F.G. and L.d.C.G.; Methodology, L.M.d.O.V., N.D.-V.L.C., D.B.C.R. and A.T.R.; Validation, D.B.C.R., A.T.R., L.L.B., F.C.d.O.K., M.d.C.B.L. and M.F.d.S.N.S.; Formal analysis, L.M.d.O.V., A.T.R. and N.D.-V.L.C.; Investigation, F.C.d.O.K., M.d.C.B.L., M.F.d.S.N.S. and N.C.M.d.S.; Resources, M.E.L.M.; Data Curation, L.M.d.O.V. and D.B.C.R.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, L.H.F.G.; Writing—Review and Editing, L.d.C.G., L.H.F.G. and N.D.-V.L.C.; Visualization, N.D.-V.L.C., A.T.R., L.L.B., F.C.d.O.K. and M.d.C.B.L.; Supervision, M.E.L.M. and L.d.C.G.; Project Administration, L.H.F.G.; Funding Acquisition, L.d.C.G. and L.H.F.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Fernandes Figueira National Institute for Women, Children, and Adolescents Health—Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (protocol code 79553224.7.0000.5269; date of approval: 23 April 2024).

Informed Consent Statement

Patient consent was waived due to the retrospective design of the study, which used data extracted from the infection control committee database without direct patient contact or identifiable personal information.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to institutional restrictions and patient confidentiality.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the staff of the infection control committee and the Fernandes Figueira National Institute for Women, Children, and Adolescents Health—FIOCRUZ for their support during the data collection and analysis.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
CCTCCentral catheter tip culture
CoNS Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus
CSFCerebrospinal fluid
CVCCentral venous catheter
EVDExternal ventricular drain
ESBLExtended-spectrum beta-lactamase
HAIsHealthcare-associated infections
HICCHospital infection control committee
ICCInfection control committee
ICUIntensive care unit
IRASInfections related to healthcare assistance
KPCKlebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase
MDRMultidrug-resistant
MDROsMultidrug-resistant organisms
MRSAMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
NICUNeonatal intensive care unit
PICUPediatric intensive care unit
SICUSurgical intensive care unit
UCUrine culture
VPVentriculoperitoneal

References

  1. Silva, B.B.; Silva Júnior, M.; Menezes, F.G.; Troster, E.J. Factors associated with multidrug-resistant bacteria in healthcare-associated infections: A pediatric intensive care unit case-control study. Einstein 2022, 20, eAO6704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Martins, A.P.S.; da Mata, C.P.S.M.; Dos Santos, U.R.; de Araújo, C.A.; Leite, E.M.M.; de Carvalho, L.D.; Vidigal, P.G.; Vieira, C.D.; Dos Santos-Key, S.G. Association between multidrug-resistant bacteria and outcomes in intensive care unit patients: A non-interventional study. Front. Public Health 2024, 11, 1297350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. da Silva, P.L.N.; Aguiar, A.L.C.; Gonçalves, R.P.F. Relação de custo-benefício na prevenção e no controle das infecções relacionadas à assistência à saúde em uma unidade de terapia intensiva neonatal. J. Health Biol. Sci. 2017, 5, 142–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bass, L.M.; de Meireles, L.H.F.; Kiriyama, E.J.; Dos Santos, N.O.; de Sousa, A.H.F.; Silva, K.C.D.C.D.; de Moura, R.M.; Prandini, C.M.; Santos, G.C.S.D.; Dos Santos, R.G.; et al. Cost savings of a nationwide project preventing healthcare-associated infections in adult, paediatric and neonatal critical care settings in Brazil: A micro-costing study. BMJ Open 2025, 15, e097515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Prevenção de Infecções por Microrganismos Multirresistentes em Serviços de Saúde—Série Segurança do Paciente e Qualidade em Serviços de Saúde; Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária: Brasília, Brazil, 2021. Available online: https://www.gov.br/anvisa/pt-br/centraisdeconteudo/publicacoes/servicosdesaude/publicacoes/manual-prevencao-de-multirresistentes7.pdf (accessed on 22 July 2025).
  6. Fanelli, C.; Pistidda, L.; Terragni, P.; Pasero, D. Infection Prevention and Control Strategies According to the Type of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria and Candida auris in Intensive Care Units: A Pragmatic Resume including Pathogens R0 and a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Antibiotics 2024, 13, 789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Horan, T.C.; Andrus, M.; Dudeck, M.A. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am. J. Infect. Control 2008, 36, 309–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Bernatchez, S.F. Reducing antimicrobial resistance by practicing better infection prevention and control. Am. J. Infect. Control 2023, 51, 1063–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sartelli, M.; Marini, C.P.; McNelis, J.; Coccolini, F.; Rizzo, C.; Labricciosa, F.M.; Petrone, P. Preventing and Controlling Healthcare-Associated Infections: The First Principle of Every Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in Hospital Settings. Antibiotics 2024, 13, 896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Spoto, S.; Markley, J.D.; Valeriani, E.; Abbate, A.; Argemi, J.; Markley, R.; Fogolari, M.; Locorriere, L.; Anguissola, G.B.; Battifoglia, G.; et al. Active Surveillance Cultures and Procalcitonin in Combination with Clinical Data to Guide Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy in Hospitalized Medical Patients with Sepsis. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 797932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Q.; Li, W.; Shi, D.; Xu, Y. The Impact of Infection Control Policies on Hospital Acquired Infections by MDROs from 2016 to 2023. Infect. Drug Resist. 2024, 17, 4213–4221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Geng, Y.; Liu, Z.; Ma, X.; Pan, T.; Chen, M.; Dang, J.; Zhang, P.; Chen, C.; Zhao, Y.; Pan, D.; et al. Infection prevention and control measures for multidrug-resistant organisms: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Infection 2025, 53, 1789–1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dias, V.M.C.H.; Silva, D.M.W.D.; Burger, M.; Oliveira, A.A.S.; Capelo, P.J.; Specian, F.A.D.R.; Figueiredo, M.C.; Tuon, F.F.; Baena, C.P. Active surveillance of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative healthcare-associated infections in a low-middle-income country city. Braz. J. Infect. Dis. 2021, 25, 101540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Medeiros, A.F.; Bertollo, C.M.; Faria, B.C.; Almeida, C.D.; Leite, E.M.; Vieira, L.R.; Souza, A.F.; Abreu, M.H.; Souza, R.P.; Martins, M.A. Antimicrobial consumption and resistance in a tertiary care hospital in Brazil: A 7-year time series. J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 2024, 18, S344–S352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Salomão, R.; Rosenthal, V.D.; Grimberg, G.; Maretti-da-Silva, M.A. Surveillance programme for multidrug-resistant bacteria in healthcare-associated infections: An urban perspective in South Brazil. J. Hosp. Infect. 2023, 80, 351–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rampelotto, R.F.; Coelho, S.S.; Franco, L.N.; da Mota, A.D.; Calegari, L.F.; Jacobi, L.F.; Hörner, R. Coagulase-negative staphylococci isolates from blood cultures of newborns in a tertiary hospital in southern Brazil. Braz. J. Pharm. Sci. 2022, 58, e19664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Pinheiro, M.S.B.; Nicoletti, C.; Boszczowski, I.; Puccini, D.M.T.; Ramos, S.R.T.S. Nosocomial infections at Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Does the place of birth matter? Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 2009, 27, 6–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Michels, R.; Last, K.; Becker, S.L.; Papan, C. Update on Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci—What the Clinician Should Know. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Becker, K.; Heilmann, C.; Peters, G. Coagulase-negative staphylococci. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2014, 27, 870–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Heilmann, C.; Ziebuhr, W.; Becker, K. Are coagulase-negative staphylococci virulent? Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2019, 25, 1071–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Brito, D.V.; Brito, C.S.; Resende, D.S.; Moreira do Ó, J.; Abdallah, V.O.; Gontijo Filho, P.P. Nosocomial infections in a Brazilian neonatal intensive care unit: A 4-year surveillance study. Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 2010, 43, 633–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Shane, A.L.; Sánchez, P.J.; Stoll, B.J. Neonatal sepsis. Lancet 2017, 390, 1770–1780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Herbozo, C.; Julca, I.; Flores, F.; Hernandez, R.; Zegarra, J. Incidence and microbiological characteristics of neonatal late onset sepsis in a neonatal intensive care unit in Peru. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2021, 108, 171–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). Nota Técnica nº 1/2013: Medidas de Prevenção e Controle de Infecções por Enterobactérias Multirresistentes; ANVISA: Brasília, Brazil, 2013. Available online: https://www.gov.br/anvisa/pt-br/centraisdeconteudo/publicacoes/servicosdesaude/notas-tecnicas/notas-tecnicas-vigentes/nota-tecnica-gvims-ggtes-anvisa-no-01-2013/view (accessed on 15 March 2025).
  25. Simner, P.J.; Pitout, J.D.D.; Dingle, T.C. Laboratory detection of carbapenemases among Gram-negative organisms. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2024, 37, e00054-22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2019; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Washington, DC, USA, 2022. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/biggest-threats.html (accessed on 3 April 2025).
  27. Sadikot, R.T.; Blackwell, T.S.; Christman, J.W.; Prince, A.S. Pathogen-host interactions in Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2005, 171, 1209–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: A systematic analysis. Lancet 2022, 399, 629–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Weiner-Lastinger, L.M.; Abner, S.; Edwards, J.R.; Kallen, A.J.; Karlsson, M.; Magill, S.S.; Pollock, D.; See, I.; Soe, M.M.; Walters, M.S.; et al. Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with adult healthcare-associated infections: Summary of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2015–2017. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2020, 41, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. David, M.Z.; Daum, R.S. Community-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Epidemiology and Clinical Consequences of an Emerging Epidemic. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2010, 23, 616–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rodrigues, M.V.; Fortaleza, C.M.; Riboli, D.F.; Rocha, R.S.; Rocha, C.; da Cunha, M.L. Molecular epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a burn unit from Brazil. Burns 2013, 39, 1242–1249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Brazilian Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (BrCAST). Tabela de Pontos de Corte Clínicos BrCAST–EUCAST–Versão 13, Válida a Partir de 15-03-2023; BrCAST: São Paulo, Brazil, 2023; Available online: https://brcast.org.br/documentos/ (accessed on 4 April 2025).
Table 1. Distribution of pathogens—pediatric intensive care unit (PICU).
Table 1. Distribution of pathogens—pediatric intensive care unit (PICU).
Sample TypePathogenN%
Blood cultureCoagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) *1090.9
Burkholderia cepacia complex110.1
Urine culture (UC)Klebsiella pneumoniae266.7
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia133.3
Tracheal aspiratePseudomonas aeruginosa730.4
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia730.4
B. cepacia complex417.4
Enterobacter cloacae14.3
S. aureus14.3
A. baumannii complex14.3
Klebsiella oxytoca14.3
Serratia marcescens14.3
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)S. epidermidis1100
Nasal swabMRSA **7100
Retal swabPseudomonas aeruginosa6 42.8
ESBL ***7 50
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia1 0.8
* Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS)—in blood culture—S. epidermidis, S. hominis, and S. haemolyticus. ** MRSA—methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. *** ESBL—extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing organisms.
Table 2. Distribution of pathogens—neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).
Table 2. Distribution of pathogens—neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).
Sample TypePathogenN%
Blood cultureCoagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) *1465
S. aureus313
S. warneri1 4.3
Enterobacter cloacae28.7
Enterococcus faecalis1 4.3
P. aeruginosa1 4.3
Serratia marcescens1 4.3
Urine culture (UC)Enterobacter cloacae2 20
Enterococcus faecalis2 20
K. pneumoniae2 20
Serratia marcescens1 10
P. aeruginosa1 10
A. baumannii1 10
S. aureus1 10
Tracheal aspirateP. aeruginosa2 28.6
S. aureus2 28.6
A. baumannii1 14.3
K. pneumoniae1 14.3
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia1 14.3
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) *233.4
S. warneri1 16.7
S. aureus1 16.7
S. lugdunensis1 16.7
K. pneumoniae1 16.7
Nasal swabMRSA **74100
Retal swabPseudomonas aeruginosa1126.8
ESBL ***3073.2
* Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS)—on blood culture—S. epidermidis and S. haemolyticus. In CFS: S. hominis and S. haemolyticus. ** MRSA—methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. *** ESBL—extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing organisms.
Table 3. Distribution of pathogens—surgical neonatal intensive care unit (SICU).
Table 3. Distribution of pathogens—surgical neonatal intensive care unit (SICU).
Sample TypePathogenN%
Blood cultureCoagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) *1055.8
K. pneumoniae2 11.8
S. aureus2 11.8
P. aeruginosa1 5.9
Enterobacter cloacae1 5.9
Klebsiella aerogenes1 5.9
Central catheter tip cultures (CCTCs) Enterobacter cloacae1100
Nasal swabMRSA **17100
Retal swabPseudomonas aeruginosa736.8
ESBL ***1263.2
* Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS)—in blood culture—S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, and S. saprophyticus. In CFS: S. hominis and S. haemolyticus. ** MRSA—methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. *** ESBL—extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing organisms.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

de Oliveira Villar, L.M.; Costa, N.D.-V.L.; Reis, D.B.C.; Reis, A.T.; Braga, L.L.; de Oliveira Kegele, F.C.; da Conceição Borges Lopes, M.; da Silva Neta Soares, M.F.; Moreira, M.E.L.; da Silva, N.C.M.; et al. Profile of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units of a Maternal and Child Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Antibiotics 2025, 14, 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14111090

AMA Style

de Oliveira Villar LM, Costa ND-VL, Reis DBC, Reis AT, Braga LL, de Oliveira Kegele FC, da Conceição Borges Lopes M, da Silva Neta Soares MF, Moreira MEL, da Silva NCM, et al. Profile of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units of a Maternal and Child Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Antibiotics. 2025; 14(11):1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14111090

Chicago/Turabian Style

de Oliveira Villar, Lucas Meneses, Natalie Del-Vecchio Lages Costa, Danielle Bonotto Cabral Reis, Adriana Teixeira Reis, Leticia Linhares Braga, Fabíola Cristina de Oliveira Kegele, Maria da Conceição Borges Lopes, Maria Francisca da Silva Neta Soares, Maria Elisabeth Lopes Moreira, Natália Chantal Magalhães da Silva, and et al. 2025. "Profile of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units of a Maternal and Child Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil" Antibiotics 14, no. 11: 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14111090

APA Style

de Oliveira Villar, L. M., Costa, N. D.-V. L., Reis, D. B. C., Reis, A. T., Braga, L. L., de Oliveira Kegele, F. C., da Conceição Borges Lopes, M., da Silva Neta Soares, M. F., Moreira, M. E. L., da Silva, N. C. M., Gomes, L. H. F., & Guida, L. d. C. (2025). Profile of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units of a Maternal and Child Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Antibiotics, 14(11), 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14111090

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop