Articles Vol. 67 No. 7 26/07/2026

SURVEY ON THE TREATMENT OF SOFT TISSUE INFECTIONS AT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HCMC

Tran Nguyen Phuong1,2,3,4, Tran Nguyen Phuong1,3, Le Duc Don1,3, Nguyen Le Hoang Tuan1,3, Bui Hong Thien Thanh1,3,4,5
1 Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, University Medical Center Ho Chi Minh City
2 Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City
3 Khoa CTCH, Bệnh viện Đại học Y Dược TP.HCM
4 Bộ môn CTCH và PHCN, Trường Y, Đại học Y Dược TP.HCM
5 Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67i7.5942
31 Views
0 Downloads
Keywords
Soft tissue infection, MRSA.
Abstract

Background: Soft tissue infections pose significant clinical challenges, particularly with the rise of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This study aimed to investigate the epidemiological, microbiological, and treatment characteristics at a tertiary hospital in Southern Vietnam. Methods: A retrospective descriptive study was conducted on 469 patients with soft tissue infections treated at the Department of Orthopedic Trauma, University Medical Center Ho Chi Minh City, from January 2022 to December 2024. Results: Mean age was 53.6 ± 16.4 years; 56.5% were male; 47.8% had diabetes mellitus. Soft tissue abscess accounted for 55.7%; lower extremity involvement 77.4%. Culture-positive rate was 78.0%, yielding 524 bacterial isolates. MRSA comprised 90.1% of S. aureus strains and was present in 51.9% of culture-positive patients. Mean hospital stay was 13.0 ± 8.7 days; 96.8% required surgical intervention.Conclusions: The MRSA rate of 90.1% is among the highest reported globally. Empirical antibiotic regimens should prioritize MRSA coverage, and infection control measures should be strengthened.

References
[1]
GBD 2021 Other Musculoskeletal Disorders Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of other musculoskeletal disorders, 1990-2020, and projections to 2050. Lancet Rheumatol. 2023;5(11):e670-e682. DOI: 10.1016/S2665-9913(23)00232-1 Google Scholar
[2]
Premkumar A, Kolin DA, Farley KX, et al. Projected economic burden of periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and knee in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2021;36(5):1484-1489. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.12.005 Google Scholar
[3]
Wu H, Jia C, Wang X, et al. The impact of methicillin resistance on clinical outcome among patients with Staphylococcus aureus osteomyelitis: a retrospective cohort study of 482 cases. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):8006. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-35111-w Google Scholar
[4]
Rajasekaran S, Mengesha MG, Ramachandran K, et al. Orthopedic postoperative infection profile and antibiotic sensitivity of 2038 patients across 24 countries. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2024;52:102405. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.04.018 Google Scholar
[5]
Nguyễn Thu Hiền, Nguyễn Thị Ngọc Lan. Nhận xét tình trạng nhiễm trùng khớp và phần mềm cạnh khớp tại khoa Cơ Xương Khớp - Bệnh viện Bạch Mai giai đoạn 2020-2021. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam. 2021;507(2):142-146. DOI: 10.51298/vmj.v506i2.1260 Google Scholar
[6]
Hoàng Anh Phú, Phạm Văn Tú, Phạm Hoài Thu. Tình trạng nhiễm trùng cơ xương khớp điều trị tại Khoa Nội tổng hợp - Bệnh viện Đại học Y Hà Nội. Tạp chí Nghiên cứu Y học. 2023;171(10):18-24. DOI: 10.52852/tcncyh.v171i10.1987 Google Scholar
[7]
Fu M, Qi H, Zhu S, Zhu D, Sun C. Type 2 diabetes mellitus has a positive role in osteomyelitis: A Mendelian randomization analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024;103(39):e39833. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000039833. Google Scholar