medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2014, Número 6

<< Anterior

salud publica mex 2014; 56 (6)


REPENSAR qué SIGNIFICA “ESTÉRIL”* El microbioma hospitalario

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 66
Paginas: 666-681
Archivo PDF: 669.84 Kb.


FRAGMENTO

Cuando se inauguró el nuevo pabellón del hospital de la Universidad de Chicago, se veía inmaculado. Los pisos brillaban y las camillas de acero inoxidable resplandecían en el nuevo Centro de Atención y Descubrimiento. Incluso una vez que abrió sus puertas y se admitió a los primeros pacientes, las superficies seguían viéndose estériles en gran medida. Al parecer, las cosas estaban exactamente como deberían: tan libres de vida microbiana como fuera humanamente posible.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. NCHS. National Hospital Discharge Survey, 2010. Atlanta, GA:National Center for Health Statistics, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010). Disponible en: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhds/1general/2010gen1_agesexalos.pdf [consultado el 29 de mayo de 2014].

  2. Klevens RM, et al. Estimating health care-associated infections and deaths in U.S. hospitals, 2002. Public Health Rep 122(2):160–166 (2007); http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17357358.

  3. Zimlichman E, et al. Health care–associated infections: a meta-analysis of costs and financial impact on the US health care system. JAMA Intern Med 173(22):2039–2046 (2013); doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.9763.

  4. Kohn LT, et al., eds. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine [Instituto de medicina], National Academy Press (1999). Disponible en: http://goo.gl/cw95gd [consultado el 29 de mayo de 2014].

  5. Ducel G, et al., eds. Prevention of Hospital-Acquired Infections: A Practical Guide, 2ª ed. Ginebra, Suiza: World Health Organization [Organización Mundial de la Salud] (2002). Disponible en: http://goo.gl/L3Nys2 [consultado el 29 de mayo de 2014].

  6. Rintala H, et al. Diversity and seasonal dynamics of bacterial community in indoor environment. BMC Microbiol 8:56 (2008); doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-8-56.

  7. Jakobsson HE, et al. Short-term antibiotic treatment has differing long-term impacts on the human throat and gut microbiome. PLoS ONE 5(3):e9836 (2010); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009836.

  8. Kowalchuk GA, et al. Finding the needles in the metagenome haystack. Microbial Ecol 53(3)475–485 (2007); doi: 10.1007/s00248-006-9201-2.

  9. Li K, et al. Analyses of the microbial diversity across the human microbiome. PLoS ONE 7(6):e32118 (2012); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032118.

  10. Dethlefsen L, et al. An ecological and evolutionary perspective on human–microbe mutualism and disease. Nature 449(7164):811–818 (2007); doi: 10.1038/nature06245.

  11. Knight R, et al. Unlocking the potential of metagenomics through replicated experimental design. Nat Biotechnol 30(6):513–520 (2012); doi: 10.1038/nbt.2235.

  12. Caulfield T, et al. Reflections on the cost of “low-cost” whole genome sequencing: framing the health policy debate. PLoS Biol 11(11): e1001699 (2013); doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001699.

  13. Bunge J, et al. Estimating the number of species in microbial diversity studies. Annu Rev Stat Appl 1:427–445 (2014); doi: 10.1146/annurev-statistics-022513-115654.

  14. Chitsaz H, et al. Efficient de novo assembly of single-cell bacterial genomes from short-read data sets. Nat Biotechnol 29(10):915–921 (2011); doi: 10.1038/nbt.1966.

  15. Hugenholtz P, et al. Impact of culture-independent studies on the emerging phylogenetic view of bacterial diversity. J Bacteriol 180(18):4765–4774 (1998); http://jb.asm.org/content/180/18/4765.short.

  16. Kelley ST, Gilbert JA. Studying the microbiology of the indoor environment. Genome Biol 14(2):202 (2013); doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-2-202.

  17. Angenent LT, et al. Molecular identification of potential pathogens in water and air of a hospital therapy pool. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(13):4860–4865 (2005); doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501235102.

  18. Perkins SD, et al. Potentially pathogenic bacteria in shower water and air of a stem cell transplant unit. Appl Environ Microbiol 75(16):5363–5372 (2009); doi: 10.1128/AEM.00658-09.

  19. Feazel LM, et al. Opportunistic pathogens enriched in showerhead biofilms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(38):16393–16399 (2009); doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908446106.

  20. Maki DG, Tambyah PA. Engineering out the risk for infection with urinary catheters. Emerg Infect Dis 7(2):342–347 (2001); http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2631699/.

  21. Frank DN, et al. Culture-independent microbiological analysis of Foley urinary catheter biofilms. PLoS ONE 4(11):e7811 (2009); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007811.

  22. Zhang L, et al. Microbiological pattern of arterial catheters in the intensive care unit. BMC Microbiol 10:266 (2010); doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-10-266.

  23. Hewitt KM, et al. Office space bacterial abundance and diversity in three metropolitan areas. PLoS ONE 7(5):e37849 (2012); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037849.

  24. Dawson P, et al. Residence time and food contact time effects on transfer of Salmonella typhimurium from tile, wood and carpet: testing the five-second rule. J Appl Microbiol 102(4):945–953 (2007); doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.03171.x.

  25. Grice EA, et al. A diversity profile of the human skin microbiota. Genome Res 18(7):1043–1050 (2008); doi: 10.1101/gr.075549.107.

  26. Grice EA, et al. Topographical and temporal diversity of the human skin microbiome. Science 324(5931):1190–1192 (2009); doi: 10.1126/science.1171700.

  27. Flores GE, et al. Microbial biogeography of public restroom surfaces. PLoS ONE 6(11):e28132 (2011); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028132.

  28. Fierer N, et al. Forensic identification using skin bacterial communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107(14):6477–6481 (2010); doi: 10.1073/pnas.1000162107.

  29. Meadow JF, et al. Bacterial communities on classroom surfaces vary with human contact. Microbiome 2(1):7 (2014); doi: 10.1186/2049-2618-2-7.

  30. Fleischer M, et al. Microbiological control of airborne contamination in hospitals. Indoor Built Environ 15(1):53–56 (2006); doi: 10.1177/1420326X06062230.

  31. Brooks B, et al. Microbes in the neonatal intensive care unit resemble those found in the gut of premature infants. Microbiome 2(1):1 (2014); doi: 10.1186/2049-2618-2-1.

  32. Morowitz MJ, et al. Redefining the role of intestinal microbes in the pathogenesis of necrotizing enterocolitis. Pediatrics 125(4):777–785 (2010); doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-3149.

  33. Funkhouser L, Bordenstein S. Mom knows best: the universality of maternal microbial transmission. PLoS Biol 11(8):e1001631 (2013); doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001631.

  34. Gaüzère C, et al. ‘Core species’ in three sources of indoor air belonging to the human micro-environment to the exclusion of outdoor air. Sci Total Environ 485–486:508–517 (2014); doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.03.117.

  35. Meadow JF, et al. Indoor airborne bacterial communities are influenced by ventilation, occupancy, and outdoor air source. Indoor Air 24(1):41–48 (2014); doi: 10.1111/ina.12047.

  36. Tringe SG, et al. The airborne metagenome in an indoor urban environment. PLoS ONE 3(4):e1862 (2008); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001862.

  37. Kembel SW, et al. Architectural design drives the biogeography of indoor bacterial communities. PLoS ONE 9(1):e87093 (2014); doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087093.

  38. Kembel SW, et al. Architectural design influences the diversity and structure of the built environment microbiome. ISME J 6(8):1469–1479 (2012); doi: 10.1038/ismej.2011.211.

  39. Berg G, et al. Beneficial effects of plant-associated microbes on indoor microbiomes and human health? Frontiers Microbiol 5:15 (2014); doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00015.

  40. Lund S, et al. Reality of glove use and handwashing in a community hospital. Am J Infect Control 22(6):352–357 (1994); doi: 10.1016/0196-6553(94)90034-5.

  41. Gilkeson CA, et al. Measurement of ventilation and airborne infection risk in large naturally ventilated hospital wards. Build Environ 65:35–48 (2013); doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.03.006

  42. Obokata H, et al. Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency. Nature 505(7485):641–647 (2014); doi: 10.1038/nature12968.

  43. Obokata H, et al. Bidirectional developmental potential in reprogrammed cells with acquired pluripotency. Nature 505(7485):676–680 (2014); doi: 10.1038/nature12969.

  44. Cyranoski D. Acid-bath stem-cell study under investigation. Nature News (17 February 2014); doi: 10.1038/nature.2014.14738.

  45. Japan researcher agrees to withdraw disputed stem cell paper. Reuters (4 June 2014). Disponible en: http://goo.gl/3RIynL [consultado el 24 de junio de 2014].

  46. Begley CG, Ellis LM. Drug development: raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature 483(7391):531–533 (2012); doi: 10.1038/483531a.

  47. Macleod MR, et al. Evidence for the efficacy of NXY-059 in experimental focal cerebral ischaemia is confounded by study quality. Stroke 39(10):2824–2829 (2008); doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.515957.

  48. Bebarta V, et al. Emergency medicine animal research: does use of randomization and blinding affect the results? Acad Emerg Med 10(6):684–687 (2003); doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00056.x.

  49. Crossley NA, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in the design of experimental stroke studies—a metaepidemiologic approach. Stroke 39(3):929–934 (2008); doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.498725.

  50. Rooke ED, et al. Dopamine agonists in animal models of Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 17(5):313–320 (2011); doi: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2011.02.010.

  51. Vesterinen HM, et al. Improving the translational hit of experimental treatments in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J 16(9):1044–1055 (2010); doi: 10.1177/1352458510379612.

  52. Krauth D, et al. Instruments for assessing risk of bias and other methodological criteria of published animal studies: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect 121(9):985–992 (2013); doi: 10.1289/ehp.1206389.

  53. Collins FS, Tabak LA. Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility. Nature 505(7485):612–613 (2014); doi: 10.1038/505612a.

  54. NIH. Development of an NIH BD2K Data Discovery Index Coordination Consortium (U24) [beca de investigación]. Bethesda, MD:National Institutes of Health [Institutos Nacionales de Salud] (13 de diciembre de 2013). Disponible en: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HL-14-031.html [consultado el 24 de junio de 2014].

  55. NCBI. PubMed Commons [página web]. Bethesda, MD:National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine (2014). Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedcommons/ [consultada el 24 de junio de 2014].

  56. McNutt M. Reproducibility. Science 343(6168):229 (2014); doi: 10.1126/science.1250475.

  57. Landis SC, et al. A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature 490(7419):187–191 (2012); doi: 10.1038/nature11556.

  58. Kilkenny C, et al. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol 8(6):e1000412 (2010); doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412.

  59. Announcement: reducing our irreproducibility. Nature 496(7446):398 (2013); doi: 10.1038/496398a.

  60. NINR. Chronic Wounds: Advancing the Science from Prevention to Healing (R01) [beca de investigación]. Bethesda, MD:National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health [Instituto Nacional de Investigación de Enfermería, Institutos Nacionales de Salud] (6 de mayo de 2014). Disponible en: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-NR-15-001.html [consultado el 24 de junio de 2014]. La Sección IV(2) incluye un ejemplo de una lista de verificación.

  61. NTP. Draft OHAT Approach for Systematic Review and Evidence Integration for Literature-based Health Assessments—Febrero de 2013. Research Triangle Park, NC:National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health [Programa de Toxicología del Instituto Nacional de Ciencias de la Salud Ambiental, Institutos Nacionales de Salud] (26 de febrero de 2013). Disponible en: http://goo.gl/85a20D [consultado el 24 de junio de 2014].

  62. Rooney AA, et al. Systematic review and evidence integration for literature-based environmental health science assessments. Environ Health Perspect 122(7):711–718 (2014); doi: 10.1289/ehp.1307972.

  63. Bissell M. Reproducibility: the risks of the replication drive. Nature 503(7476):333–334 (2013); doi: 10.1038/503333a.

  64. The Churchill Group. The Collaborative Cross (CC) [página web]. Bar Harbor, ME:The Churchill Group, The Jackson Laboratory (2014). Disponible en: http://churchill.jax.org/research/cc/ccresources.shtml [consultada el 24 de junio de 2014].

  65. The Churchill Group. The Diversity Outbred (DO) [página web]. Bar Harbor, ME:The Churchill Group, The Jackson Laboratory (2014). Disponible en: http://churchill.jax.org/research/cc/doresources.shtml [consultada el 24 de junio de 2014].

  66. Franzoni C, et al. Changing incentives to publish. Science 333(6043):702–703 (2011); doi: 10.1126/science.1197286.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com