4.7 Article

Host Factors and Portal of Entry Outweigh Bacterial Determinants To Predict the Severity of Escherichia coli Bacteremia

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 777-783

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01902-10

关键词

-

资金

  1. Reseau de Recherche Clinique [RBM-03-58]
  2. Projet Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique [AOR 04 053]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Escherichia coli ranks among the organisms most frequently isolated from cases of bacteremia. The relative contribution of the host and bacteria to E. coli bacteremia severity remains unknown. We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study to identify host and bacterial factors associated with E. coli bacteremia severity. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death, up to 28 days after the first positive blood culture. Among 1,051 patients included, 136 (12.9%) died. Overall, 604 (57.5%) patients were female. The median age was 70 years, and 202 (19.2%) episodes were nosocomial. The most frequent comorbidities were immunocompromised status (37.9%), tobacco addiction (21.5%), and diabetes mellitus (20.1%). The most common portal of entry was the urinary tract (56.9%). Most E. coli isolates belonged to phylogenetic group B2 (52.0%). The multivariate analysis retained the following factors as predictive of death: older age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.09 to 1.43] for each 10-year increment), cirrhosis (OR = 4.85 [95% CI, 2.49 to 9.45]), hospitalization before bacteremia (OR = 4.13 [95% CI, 2.49 to 6.82]), being an immunocompromised patient not hospitalized before bacteremia (OR = 3.73 [95% CI, 2.25 to 6.18]), and a cutaneous portal of entry (OR = 6.45 [95% CI, 1.68 to 24.79]); a urinary tract portal of entry and the presence of the ireA virulence gene were negatively correlated with death (OR = 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.70] and OR = 0.53 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.91], respectively). In summary, host factors and the portal of entry outweigh bacterial determinants for predicting E. coli bacteremia severity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据