Evidence Hub

Clinical characteristics and carbapenem resistance gene of Klebsiella pneumonia isolates from children in Chongqing region from 2019 to 2024

M.-R. Zhou, D.-P. Chen, Chunmei Jing, Zhong-Zheng Xiong, Yu-Pei Xiang, F. Liu, W. Xie

Zhonghua yu fang yi xue za zhi [Chinese journal of preventive medicine], 2025

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the clinical distribution characteristics changes in antimicrobial resistance, and carbapenemase resistance genes of Klebsiella pneumoniae isolated from children in Chongqing region during the period of January 2019 to December 2024, providing a basis for the rational use of antibiotics and the prevention and control of nosocomial infections. Methods: An observational study was conducted to retrospectively analyze 5 020 Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP) isolates detected in four hospitals of the Southwest Pediatric Laboratory Specialty Alliance. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by the minimum inhibitory concentration method combined with the disk diffusion method. Results were interpreted according to the 2024 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) standards. Carbapenemase resistance genes were detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) combined with Sanger sequencing. WHONET 5.6 was used for resistance analysis and SPSS 19.0 for statistical analysis. The chi-square test was used to assess trends in resistance rates, ESBL detection rates, and resistance rates of different CRKP carbapenemase genotypes from 2019 to 2024. Statistical significance was confirmed if the two-tailed P-value was <0.05. Results: A total of 5 020 strains were isolated, with a detection rate of 5.1% (5 020/99 063). The majority were from sputum (59.2%, 2 970/5 020), followed by pus (17.1%, 857), urine (9.7%, 487), venous blood (6.5%, 326), secretions…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free