A snapshot of antimicrobial resistance in Mexico. Results from 47 centers from 20 states during a six-month period.

AIM:We aimed to assess the resistance rates of antimicrobial-resistant, in bacterial pathogens of epidemiological importance in 47 Mexican centers. MATERIAL AND METHODS:In this retrospective study, we included a stratified sample of 47 centers, covering 20 Mexican states. Selected isolates considered as potential causatives of disease collected over a 6-month period were included. Laboratories employed their usual methods to perform microbiological studies. The results were deposited into a database and analyzed with the WHONET 5.6 software. RESULTS:In this 6-month study, a total of 22,943 strains were included. Regarding Gram-negatives, carbapenem resistance was detected in ≤ 3% in Escherichia coli, 12.5% in Klebsiella sp. and Enterobacter sp., and up to 40% in Pseudomonas aeruginosa; in the latter, the resistance rate for piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP) was as high as 19.1%. In Acinetobacter sp., resistance rates for cefepime, ciprofloxacin, meropenem, and TZP were higher than 50%. Regarding Gram-positives, methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was as high as 21.4%, and vancomycin (VAN) resistance reached up to 21% in Enterococcus faecium. Acinetobacter sp. presented the highest multidrug resistance (53%) followed by Klebsiella sp. (22.6%) and E. coli (19.4%). CONCLUSION:The multidrug resistance of Acinetobacter sp., Klebsiella sp. and E. coli and the carbapenem resistance in specific groups of enterobacteria deserve special attention in Mexico. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and MRSA are common in our hospitals. Our results present valuable information for the implementation of measures to control drug resistance

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events