eMJA     The Medical Journal of Australia

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | Classifieds | Contact | More... | Topics | Search | Login | Buy full access   

Letters

Prevalence of colonisation with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) among haemodialysis outpatients in Victoria: implications for screening

MJA 2005; 182 (9): 492

Laurelle J Burrell,* Elizabeth A Grabsch, Alexander A Padiglione, M Lindsay Grayson§

* Infectious Diseases Research Nurse, Infection Control Scientist, § Director of Infectious Diseases, Austin Hospital, Studley Road, Heidelberg, VIC 3084; Infectious Diseases Physician, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University (Alfred Hospital), Melbourne, VIC. Lindsay.GraysonATaustin.org.au

To the Editor: Patients with end-stage renal failure are a key risk group for colonisation and infection with vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE). Consequently, many renal units in Australia screen these patients regularly for VRE colonisation, to assist with infection control and treatment.1-3 Screening protocols are usually applied equally to inpatients and outpatients, even though the risk of VRE colonisation among outpatients (and therefore the cost–benefit of such screening) has not been clearly defined.

To assess the prevalence of faecal VRE colonisation among haemodialysis outpatients, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of outpatients attending 12 Victorian in-centre haemodialysis units — Austin Health (four units), Southern Health (three units) and five regional haemodialysis units (Bendigo, West Gippsland, La Trobe Valley, Central Gippsland and Bairnsdale). Patients attending these units represent about a third of the state’s in-centre haemodialysis population. The study was approved by the ethics committee at each hospital, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. All patients who attended the units between 1 October 2001 and 3 April 2002 were invited to participate.

VRE faecal carriage was assessed by three rectal swabs and one faecal specimen taken on at least three separate occasions. Specimens were inoculated onto Enterococcosel agar (BBL, Sparks, USA) containing 6 μg/mL vancomycin. All cultures were processed by standard methods for VRE identification, as described previously.2,3

Of 345 available haemodialysis patients, 269 (78%) consented to participate in the study (205 [76%] metropolitan, and 64 [86%] regional; participation rate per centre, 70%–91%). The 269 patients represented approximately 30% of Victorian in-centre haemodialysis patients. Overall, 74% of participants had assessment of all three rectal swabs and a faecal specimen. VRE faecal colonisation was found in three of the 269 participants (1.1%) — two were from separate metropolitan hospitals, and one from a regional centre. All isolates were Enterococcus faecium vanB (the most common type of VRE in Australia).3 None of these three patients were known to be previously colonised.

This 1.1% prevalence was substantially lower than the 3.0%–4.6% prevalence previously described in renal inpatients in Melbourne,2,3 and the 10% rate reported in the United States (where 33% of dialysis centres have one or more VRE-positive patients).1,4 Statistical comparisons of this study with our previous two Australian studies2,3 should be undertaken cautiously, as screening methods differed in specimen frequency, type and number. Bearing in mind this caveat, the rate of faecal VRE carriage was significantly lower among the haemodialysis outpatients in our current study compared with renal inpatients in a 1997 study by Grayson et al2 (3/269 v 9/194; P = 0.02 by χ2 test), but less definitely so when compared with renal inpatients in the 1998–1999 study of Padiglione et al3 (3/269 v 22/739; P = 0.09, by χ2 test). Since the outpatient study, screening surveys at our hospital have shown intermittent high rates of colonisation in renal inpatients and environmental contamination (unpublished data).

Given our findings in outpatients, we believe future VRE screening protocols in Australian hospitals should focus primarily on inpatients, rather than faecally continent outpatients, who have both a low rate of colonisation and low potential risk for VRE transmission or acquisition. Good compliance with practical infection control guidelines remains important to avoid widespread dissemination of VRE in our haemodialysis centres.5

Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the many staff and patients at the participating haemodialysis centres for their involvement, and to Kristianna Maher (Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC) for microbiology assistance. The study was funded by the Department of Human Services, Victoria.

  1. Roghmann MC, Fink JC, Polish L, et al. Colonization with vancomycin-resistant enterococci in chronic hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1998; 32: 254-257. <PubMed>
  2. Grayson ML, Grabsch EA, Johnson PDR, et al. Outcome of a screening program for vancomycin-resistant enterococci in a hospital in Victoria. Med J Aust 1999; 171: 133-136. <eMJA full text> <PubMed>
  3. Padiglione AA, Wolfe R, Grabsch EA, et al. Risk factors for new detection of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in acute-care hospitals that employ strict infection control procedures. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47: 2492-2498. <PubMed>
  4. Tokars JI, Frank M, Alter MJ, Arduino MJ. National surveillance of dialysis-associated diseases in the United States, 2000. Semin Dial 2002; 15: 162-171. <PubMed>
  5. Standing Committee on Infection Control. Guidelines for the management of patients with Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) colonisation/infection. Melbourne: Department of Human Services, 1999.

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | Terms of use | Classifieds | More... | Contact | Topics | Search

The Medical Journal of Australia    eMJA  

©The Medical Journal of Australia 2005 www.mja.com.au PRINT ISSN: 0025-729X ONLINE ISSN: 1326-5377