找回密码
 注册

微信登录,快人一步

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

楼主: 放飞梦想

消毒剂的使用是否会导致微生物对消毒剂的耐药?

 火... [复制链接]
发表于 2011-5-6 09:18 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 蓝鱼o_0 于 2011-5-6 09:20 编辑

回复 1# jchsmg

纵观近年来突发公共卫生,从2003年的SARS肆虐,到2004年的禽流感H5N1,从2008年的“汶川大地震”, 2009年甲型H1N1流感世界大流行,到2010年“超级细菌”(NDM-1)的多国暴发,消毒均在切断“传播途径”预防控制感染暴发中日益发挥越来越重要的作用。尽管目前尚未发现化学消毒剂对微生物有显著“失效”的现象,然而越来越多的研究已经表明,微生物对消毒剂的抗力显著增加(MIC和MBC显著增高),说明细菌在“选择压力”下,变异加快。值得注意的是,众多研究发现,微生物对某些消毒剂的抗性与其对抗生素的耐药性之间存在“关联现象”,例如吴晓松等人发现鲍曼不动杆菌抗药基因阳性株对多数消毒剂耐受浓度增加,对氯己定有抗性的假单胞菌同时对多种抗生素耐药,对三氯羟基二苯醚抗性的大肠杆菌和假单胞菌也对多种抗生素耐药;金黄色葡萄球菌对β-内酰胺类抗生素的耐药性与对季铵盐的抗性有关等等。众多事实皆说明,消毒剂与抗生素之间存在的交叉抗性。这些关联尚需要在更多的基础研究和流行病学研究中证实。这无疑给我们敲响了警钟,可以预言临床微生物对抗生素耐药的情况在一定会在“微生物存活——消毒剂灭活”的博弈中重现。为此,感控人员必须运用自己的专业知识,更科学、更合理、更高效的使用化学消毒剂,在未来应对突发公共卫生事件应急和医院感染控制中,发挥更重要的作用。


【原创】即将发表于中国消毒学专讲,如需引用请注明SIFIC或者论文作者,谢谢!
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-6 09:42 | 显示全部楼层
今天又学到一点新知识,过去没这方面的意识,其实化学消毒剂过量使用对人体等是有害的,也是一种污染,尽量避免使用,如果使用严格按要求去用(浓度,剂量)
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 10:27 | 显示全部楼层
回复 21# 蓝鱼o_0
在论坛说说,引起大家的关注是好的,但我认为,如果准备发表在杂志上,而且是可信度比较高的杂志,建议除了引用国内的研究证据以外,还应搜索一下国外的研究证据,进行比较全面的、有根有据的描述,让各个层面的人员心里有底,避免造成不必要的恐慌。
从美国《Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities, 2008》来看,滥用消毒剂会不会诱导对消毒剂不敏感的微生物?对消毒剂不敏感的微生物会不会对抗菌药物也降低敏感性?以及二者是否存在交叉耐受?这些问题更多的是一种学术层面上的探讨和研究,就目前的证据来看,这些问题并不影响我们日常抗菌药物的规范使用,以及我们日常的环境消毒方案。当然据我所知,有些消毒剂的厂家把他们的消毒剂对多重耐药菌的杀灭效果作为一个卖点,对于专业人员来说,我相信大家都有自己的判断能力。
Susceptibility of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria to Disinfectants
As with antibiotics, reduced susceptibility (or acquired “resistance”) of bacteria to disinfectants can arise by either chromosomal gene mutation or acquisition of genetic material in the form of plasmids or transposons 338, 341-343, 344 , 345, 346. When changes occur in bacterial susceptibility that renders an antibiotic ineffective against an infection previously treatable by that antibiotic, the bacteria are referred to as “resistant.” In contrast, reduced susceptibility to disinfectants does not correlate with failure of the disinfectant because concentrations used in disinfection still greatly exceed the cidal level. Thus, the word "resistance" when applied to these changes is incorrect, and the preferred term is “reduced susceptibility” or “increased tolerance”344, 347. No data are available that show that antibiotic-resistant bacteria are less sensitive to the liquid chemical germicides than antibiotic-sensitive bacteria at currently used germicide contact conditions and concentrations.
MRSA and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) are important health-care–associated agents. Some antiseptics and disinfectants have been known for years to be, because of MICs, somewhat less inhibitory to S. aureus strains that contain a plasmid-carrying gene encoding resistance to the antibiotic gentamicin 344. For example, gentamicin resistance has been shown to also encode reduced susceptibility to propamidine, quaternary ammonium compounds, and ethidium bromide 348, and MRSA strains have been found to be less susceptible than methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) strains to chlorhexidine, propamidine, and the quaternary ammonium compound cetrimide 349. In other studies, MRSA and MSSA strains have been equally sensitive to phenols and chlorhexidine, but MRSA strains were slightly more tolerant to quaternary ammonium compounds 350. Two gene families (qacCD [now referred to as smr] and qacAB) are involved in providing protection against agents that are components of disinfectant formulations such as quaternary ammonium compounds. Staphylococci have been proposed to evade destruction because the protein specified by the qacA determinant is a cytoplasmic-membrane–associated protein involved in an efflux system that actively reduces intracellular accumulation of toxicants, such as quaternary ammonium compounds, to intracellular targets 351.
Other studies demonstrated that plasmid-mediated formaldehyde tolerance is transferable from Serratia marcescens to E. coli 352 and plasmid-mediated quaternary ammonium tolerance is transferable from S. aureus to E. coli.353. Tolerance to mercury and silver also is plasmid borne 341, 343-346.
Because the concentrations of disinfectants used in practice are much higher than the MICs observed, even for the more tolerant strains, the clinical relevance of these observations is questionable. Several studies have found antibiotic-resistant hospital strains of common healthcare-associated pathogens (i.e., Enterococcus, P. aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, E. coli, S. aureus, and S. epidermidis) to be equally susceptible to disinfectants as antibiotic-sensitive strains 53, 354-356. The susceptibility of glycopeptide-intermediate S. aureus was similar to vancomycin-susceptible, MRSA 357. On the basis of these data, routine disinfection and housekeeping protocols do not need to be altered because of antibiotic resistance provided the disinfection method is effective 358, 359. A study that evaluated the efficacy of selected cleaning methods (e.g., QUAT-sprayed cloth, and QUAT-immersed cloth) for eliminating VRE found that currently used disinfection processes most likely are highly effective in eliminating VRE. However, surface disinfection must involve contact with all contaminated surfaces 358. A new method using an invisible flurorescent marker to objectively evaluate the thoroughness of cleaning activities in patient rooms might lead to improvement in cleaning of all objects and surfaces but needs further evaluation 360.
Lastly, does the use of antiseptics or disinfectants facilitate the development of disinfectant-tolerant organisms? Evidence and reviews indicate enhanced tolerance to disinfectants can be developed in response to disinfectant exposure 334, 335, 346, 347, 361. However, the level of tolerance is not important in clinical terms because it is low and unlikely to compromise the effectiveness of disinfectants of which much higher concentrations are used 347, 362.
The issue of whether low-level tolerance to germicides selects for antibiotic-resistant strains is unsettled but might depend on the mechanism by which tolerance is attained. For example, changes in the permeability barrier or efflux mechanisms might affect susceptibility to both antibiotics and germicides, but specific changes to a target site might not. Some researchers have suggested that use of disinfectants or antiseptics (e.g., triclosan) could facilitate development of antibiotic-resistant microorganisms 334, 335, 363. Although evidence in laboratory studies indicates low-level resistance to triclosan, the concentrations of triclosan in these studies were low (generally <1 μg/mL) and dissimilar from the higher levels used in antimicrobial products (2,000–20,000 μg/mL) 364, 365. Thus, researchers can create laboratory-derived mutants that demonstrate reduced susceptibility to antiseptics or disinfectants. In some experiments, such bacteria have demonstrated reduced susceptibility to certain antibiotics 335. There is no evidence that using antiseptics or disinfectants selects for antibiotic-resistant organisms in nature or that such mutants survive in nature366. ). In addition, the action of antibiotics and the action of disinfectants differ fundamentally. Antibiotics are selectively toxic and generally have a single target site in bacteria, thereby inhibiting a specific biosynthetic process. Germicides generally are considered nonspecific antimicrobials because of a multiplicity of toxic-effect mechanisms or target sites and are broader spectrum in the types of microorganisms against which they are effective 344, 347.
The rotational use of disinfectants in some environments (e.g., pharmacy production units) has been recommended and practiced in an attempt to prevent development of resistant microbes 367, 368. There have been only rare case reports that appropriately used disinfectants have resulted in a clinical problem arising from the selection or development of nonsusceptible microorganisms.
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 10:39 | 显示全部楼层
有点看不懂,消毒剂作为一种化学制品,跟药物其实是一样的,应该存在细菌耐药。
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-5-7 11:21 | 显示全部楼层
回复 23# 楚楚


    Thank you for providing the useful information. Do you have more references?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 11:25 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 蓝鱼o_0 于 2011-5-7 11:32 编辑

回复 23# 楚楚

楚管,
我非常理解您的顾虑!所以一开始在搜集资料的时候,国外的很多相关文献,我都进行了浏览,并在文中进行了引用。
说来惭愧,其实那篇文章是我代笔而作,受杨华明老师邀请。谈微生物对化学消毒剂的抗力研究进展
我也知道我的理解和认识层面是不够的,只是就我学习到的,理解到的和大家做一综述。

在查阅资料时候,我发现了,其实目前为止,尽管细菌对消毒剂是没有耐药的现象,但是,抗力确实显著增加的。
证据很多,最近的也有,比如
关于洗必泰decolonization的文章,Batra,2010,”Efficacy and Limitation of a Chlorhexidine-Based Decolonization Strategy in Preventing Transmission of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an Intensive Care Unit“Clinical Infectious Diseases 2010; 50:210–7携带抗力基因qacA/B,MIC会增加3倍。
说明这种抗力能够得到遗传并继承。
给我们带来亮点其实:一,对于细菌而言,他也是在进化,化学消毒剂跟其他药物一样,细菌能够通过自然选择进行规避这种效应,二,跟合理应用药物的同时,也应该注意合理的应用消毒剂。掌握必备的知识,避免滥用,一来环境污染二来也容易导致细菌抗力的产生。
不是为了哗然取宠,只是希望探讨并希望大家重视这样一个未来可能发生的问题。

在目前的指导原则下,这些还是可以用,但是充分了解其功能,机制能够便于我们合理化用”药“。
既是个学术问题,也是个警示!这也是从抗生素的发现发展应用到合理化管理给我带来的启示!

不当之处,敬请批评指正!
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 11:26 | 显示全部楼层
回复 24# 天鹅


未来可能发生,但是目前尚未发现。
我们应该有这种警示和预见。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 11:30 | 显示全部楼层
回复 23# 楚楚

楚管道鉴:
药物就是一个双刃剑,消毒剂也是一样。
作为感控人员,应该知道其利弊,预见其潜在的危险。合理使用及规范管理。
为什么会恐慌,因为对知识的普及不到位,愚民政策,我相信我们感控人非常专业,只要把详细情况真真实实的反应,他们会有个清晰的判断的。
对于您的提点和顾虑我也铭记!
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 11:32 | 显示全部楼层
回复 25# jchsmg
你可以看看该指南后面的参考文献,或许会得到更多线索
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-5-7 12:00 | 显示全部楼层
回复 21# 蓝鱼o_0


    Are you working inCDC and specializes in disinfection research?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-7 15:58 | 显示全部楼层
回复 8# zhangfh(星火)

有理有据,证据充分!国外的说法不一定就是正确的。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-8 09:47 | 显示全部楼层
回复 3# zhangfh(星火)


     发表于 2010-10-12 14:43 | 只看该作者
消毒剂的使用是否会导致消毒剂耐药的产生?答案是:不。
它的依据是什么?
国内抗感染专家俞云松讲座,消毒剂对鲍曼不动有耐药趋势,使用不当会引起消毒剂耐药。

咋一看前后矛盾。
您想表达的是,不当使用会导致耐消毒剂的细菌产生是吧?

您下面举的绿脓杆菌的例子也验证了细菌对临床抗生素和消毒剂抗力之间存在交叉性。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-5-11 18:55 | 显示全部楼层
we use the 1% and 2% trigenine in our lab by now. some other lab might use the vircon. while, as we know there are 3 or 4 more diffents agents in the triginine compound, i reckon no need worry too much although some bacteriae must have the ability to resist the trigenine. i.e. myco or some virus.
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2013-1-2 16:25 | 显示全部楼层
这研究的确是朴素唯物主义啊
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2013-9-29 16:35 | 显示全部楼层
从微生物与化学物质的相互作用来讲,是具有耐药性!
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2013-9-30 04:53 | 显示全部楼层
适应者,生存;不适者,淘汰。此乃自然规律。经消毒剂洗礼尚存微生物,为适应者。直白点就是:耐受该消毒剂浓度也,若此等环境状态维持下去,其子孙亦然。
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册 |

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表