Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Development of predictive nomograms for clinical use to quantify the risk of isolating resistance prone organisms in patients with infected foot ulcers

  • A. Farkas (a1), F. Lin (a1), K. Bui (a2), F. Liu (a2), G. L. An (a2), A. Pakholskiy (a1), C. F. Stavropoulos (a3), J. C. Lantis (a4) and A. Yassin (a2)...

Abstract

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) have been considered prevalent pathogens in foot infections. However, whether empiric therapy directed against these organisms is necessary, and in whom to consider treatment, is rather unclear. The aim of this study was to develop predictive algorithms for forecasting the probability of isolating these organisms in the infected wounds of patients in a population where the prevalence of resistant pathogens is low. This was a retrospective study of regression model-based risk factor analysis that included 140 patients who presented with infected, culture positive foot ulcers to two urban hospitals. A total of 307 bacteria were identified, most frequently MRSA (11.1%). P. aeruginosa prevalence was 6.5%. In the multivariable analysis, amputation (odds ratio (OR) 5.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48–27.63), renal disease (OR 5.46, 95% CI 1.43–25.16) and gangrene (OR 2.78, 95% CI 0.82–9.59) were identified as risk factors associated with higher while diabetes (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01–0.34) and Infectious Diseases Society of America infection severity >3 (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03–0.65) were associated with lower odds of P. aeruginosa isolation (C statistic 0.81). Similar analysis for MRSA showed that amputation was associated with significantly lower (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09–0.79) risk, while history of MRSA infection (OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.56–20.63) and osteomyelitis (OR 2.523, 95% CI 1.00–6.79) was associated with higher odds of isolation (C statistic 0.69). We developed two predictive nomograms with reasonable to strong ability to discriminate between patients who were likely of being infected with P. aeruginosa or MRSA and those who were not. These analyses confirm the association of some, but also question the significance of other frequently described risk factors in predicting the isolation of these organisms.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Development of predictive nomograms for clinical use to quantify the risk of isolating resistance prone organisms in patients with infected foot ulcers
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Development of predictive nomograms for clinical use to quantify the risk of isolating resistance prone organisms in patients with infected foot ulcers
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Development of predictive nomograms for clinical use to quantify the risk of isolating resistance prone organisms in patients with infected foot ulcers
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: A. Farkas, E-mail: Andras.Farkas@mountsinai.org

References

Hide All
1.International Diabetes Federation (2017) IDF Diabetes Atlas, 8th edn. Brussels, Belgium: International Diabetes Federation. http://www.diabetesatlas.org.
2.Armstrong, DG, Boulton, AJM and Bus, SA (2017) Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. New England Journal of Medicine 376, 23672375.
3.Roghmann, MC et al. (2001) MRSA colonization and the risk of MRSA bacteremia in hospitalized patients with chronic ulcers. Journal of Hospital Infection 47, 98103.
4.Armstrong, DG, Liswood, PJ and Todd, WF (1995) 1995 prevalence of mixed infections in the diabetic pedal wound a retrospective review of 112 infections. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 85, 533537.
5.Tentolouris, N et al. (2006) Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in infected and uninfected diabetic foot ulcers. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 12, 186189.
6.Lee, JS, Son, ST and Han, S (2017) Risk factors of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas infection in diabetic foot ulcers in Korea. Journal of Wound Management and Research 13, 2934.
7.Trivedi, U et al. (2014) Prevalence of multiple antibiotic resistant infections in diabetic versus nondiabetic wounds. Journal of Pathogens 2014, 173053.
8.Ertugrul, BM et al. (2012) A prospective, multi-center study: factors related to the management of diabetic foot infections. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 31, 23452352.
9.Lipsky, BA et al. (2012) Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections. Clinical Infectious Diseases 54, 16791684.
10.Young, H et al. (2015) Pseudomonas aeruginosa an uncommon cause of diabetic foot infection. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 105, 125129.
11.Powlson, AS and Coll, AP (2010) The treatment of diabetic foot infection. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 65, 39.
12.Kandemir, O et al. (2007) Risk factors for infection of the diabetic foot with multi-antibiotic resistant microorganisms. Journal of Infection 54, 439445.
13.Ji, X et al. (2014) Clinical characteristics and risk factors of diabetic foot ulcer with multidrug-resistant organism infection. International Journal of Low Extremity Wounds 13, 6471.
14.Hartemann-Heurtier, A et al. (2004) Diabetic foot ulcer and multidrug-resistant organisms: risk factors and impact. Diabetic Medicine 21, 710715.
15.Yates, C et al. (2009) Wound chronicity, inpatient care, and chronic kidney disease predispose to MRSA infection in diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care 10, 19071909.
16.Lavery, LA et al. (2014) Risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in diabetic foot infections. Diabetic Foot and Ankle 5, 23575.
17.Calcagno, V and Mazancourt, C (2010) Glmulti: an R package for easy automated model selection with (generalized) linear models. Journal of Statistical Software 34, 129.
18.Harrell, F (2001) Regression Modelling Strategies with Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis. New York: Springer.
19.Hosmer, DW et al. (1997) A comparison of goodness-of-fit tests for the logistic regression model. Statistics in Medicine 16, 965980.
20.Pepe, MS (2003) The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction. New York: Oxford Statistical Science Series.
21.R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Available at http://www.r-project.org/ (Accessed 1 December 2017).
22.Harrell, FE (2018) Regression modeling strategies. R package version 5.1-1.
23.Chakraborti, C, Le, C and Yanofsky, A (2010) Sensitivity of superficial cultures in lower extremity wounds. Journal of Hospital Medicine 5, 415420.
24.Eleftheriadou, I et al. (2010) Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in diabetic foot infections. Drugs 70, 17851797.
25.Cadena, J et al. (2016) Risk factors for the development of active methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection in patients colonized with MRSA at hospital admission. American Journal of Infection Control 44, 16171621.
26.Pickwell, K et al. (2015) Predictors of lower-extremity amputation in patients with an infected diabetic foot ulcer. Diabetes Care 38, 852857.
27.Cohen, G, Haag-Weber, M and Horl, WH (1997) Immune dysfunction in uremia. Kidney International Supplement 62, 7982.
28.Zavascki, AP, Cruz, RP and Goldani, LZ (2005) Risk factors for imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a comparative analysis of two case-control studies in hospitalized patients. Journal of Hospital Infection 59, 96101.
29.Watters, C et al. (2013) Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms perturb wound resolution and antibiotic tolerance in diabetic mice. Medical Microbiology and Immunology 202, 131141.
30.Apelqvist, J et al. (2008) Practical guidelines on the management and prevention of the diabetic foot. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews 24, 181187.
31.Kono, Y and Muder, RR (2012) Identifying the incidence of and risk factors for reamputation among patients who underwent foot amputation. Annals of Vascular Surgery 26, 11201126.
32.Mandell, LA et al. (2007) Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clinical Infectious Diseases 44, 2771.
33.Zhou, H et al. (2016) Utility of models to predict 28-day or 30-day unplanned hospital readmissions: an updated systematic review. British Medical Journal 6, 125.
34.Webb, B et al. (2016) The DRIP Score: derivation and prospective multi-center validation of a model to predict drug resistance in community-onset pneumonia. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 60, 26522663.
35.Kim, CJ et al. (2015) Factors influencing culture positivity in pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis patients with prior antibiotic exposure. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 59, 24702473.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed