4.3 Article

Blood stream infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms among spinal cord-injured patients, epidemiology over 16 years and associated risks: a comparative study

Journal

SPINAL CORD
Volume 54, Issue 9, Pages 720-725

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sc.2015.234

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study design: Retrospective study. Objectives: We aimed to describe the epidemiology of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) during bloodstream infection (BSI) and identify associated risks of MDROs among patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). Setting: A teaching hospital, expert center in disability, in France. Methods: We studied a retrospective cohort of all BSIs occurring in SCI patients hospitalized over 16 years. We described the prevalence of MDRO BSI among this population and its evolution over time and compared the BSI population due to MDROs and due to non-MDROs. Results: A total of 318 BSIs occurring among 256 patients were included in the analysis. The most frequent primary sites of infection were urinary tract infection (34.0%), pressure sore (25.2%) and catheter line-associated bloodstream infection (11.3%). MDROs were responsible for 41.8% of BSIs, and this prevalence was stable over 16 years. No significant associated factor for MDRO BSI could be identified concerning sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, primary site of infection and bacterial species in univariate and multivariate analyses. BSI involving MDROs was not associated with initial severity of sepsis compared with infection without MDROs (43.8 vs 43.6%, respectively) and was not associated either with 30th-day mortality (6.2 vs 9%, respectively). Conclusion: During BSI occurrence in an SCI population, MDROs are frequent but remain stable over years. No associated risk can be identified that would help optimize antibiotic treatment. Neither the severity of the episode nor the mortality is significantly different when an MDRO is involved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available