Search

Background: The recent crisis of refugees seeking asylum in European countries challenges public health on many levels. Most refugees currently arrive from Syria, Afghanistan, or Eritrea. Data about multidrug resistant bacteria (MDR) prevalence are not present for these countries. However, when entering the European heath care systems, data about colonisation rates regarding highly resistant bacterial pathogens are important., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional screening in four Swiss refugee centres to determine the colonization rates for MRSA and ESBL- and carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. We used pharyngeal, nasal, and inguinal swabs for MRSA and rectal swabs and urine for ESBL and carbapenemase screening using standard microbiological procedures. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) was used to determine the relatedness of MRSA isolates with high resolution due to a suspected outbreak., Results: 41/261(15.7%) refugees were colonized with MRSA. No differences regarding the country of origin were observed. However, in a single centre significantly more were colonized, which was confirmed to be a recent local outbreak. 57/241 (23.7%) refugees were colonized with ESBL with significantly higher colonisation in persons originating from the Middle East (35.1%, p<0.001). No carbapenemase producers were detected., Conclusion: The colonisation rate of the refugees was about 10 times higher for MRSA and 2-5 times higher for ESBL compared to the Swiss population. Contact precaution is warranted for these persons if they enter medical care. In cases of infections, MRSA and ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae should be considered regarding antibiotic treatment choices., Competing Interests: US is employed by Bakt. Institut Olten BIO AG. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare.

Purpose: Cellulitis is normally treated without knowledge of the responsible pathogen. Blood cultures are positive in about 2-4 %, and superficial swabs are of no value. Needle aspiration has been proposed with identifying the likely pathogen in up to 29 %, but these studies are of older date and the technique is not widely used., Methods: We prospectively evaluated the sensitivity of needle aspiration cultures in all patients with erysipelas/cellulitis. Diagnosis was made clinically by the treating physician. Needle aspiration was done with a 1 ml syringe and a 26G needle. The needle was removed and the syringe brought to the microbiological laboratory and analysed according to standard procedures., Results: 95 Patients were seen during a period of 22 month. 4 Patients were excluded, as diagnosis was not confirmed. Cellulitis was present in 10/91 and erysipelas in 81/91 patients. In the first 25 patients with needle aspiration from the margin, none was positive. In 8/66 (12 %) patients where needle aspiration was done at the site of maximum inflammation, the pathogen was identified. 4/8 Cultures were positive for S. aureus, 2/8 for streptococci and 2/8 for other bacteria. In 11/66 (16.6 %) patients, skin colonisation flora was detected. In the subgroup of patients without prior antibiotic treatment and needle aspiration from the site of maximum inflammation, sensitivity was slightly better 8/55 (14.5 %; 95 % CI 7.5-25.8 %)., Conclusions: Needle aspiration culture had a low sensitivity for detecting responsible pathogen in patients with cellulitis/erysipelas. No impact in antibiotic treatment could be observed.