4.4 Article

Clinical Impact of Ceftriaxone Resistance in Escherichia coli Bloodstream Infections: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

期刊

OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 9, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofac572

关键词

bacteremia; ceftriaxone; Escherichia coli; ESBL; mortality; resistance

资金

  1. Duke University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This prospective cohort study investigated the outcomes of patients with ceftriaxone-resistant (CRO-R) Escherichia coli bloodstream infections (BSIs). The study found that patients with CRO-R infections had poorer clinical outcomes compared to those with ceftriaxone-susceptible (CRO-S) infections. The analysis revealed that the CRO-R group had a higher proportion of Pitt bacteremia score >= 4 and a longer time to receive active antibiotic therapy. However, after adjusting for confounding factors using inverse probability weighting, there was no significant difference in the desired outcomes between the two groups. Secondary outcomes showed higher 30-day mortality, longer length of stay, and increased incidence of admission to long-term care facilities in the CRO-R group.
Background Ceftriaxone-resistant (CRO-R) Escherichia coli bloodstream infections (BSIs) are common. Methods This is a prospective cohort of patients with E coli BSI at 14 United States hospitals between November 2020 and April 2021. For each patient with a CRO-R E coli BSI enrolled, the next consecutive patient with a ceftriaxone-susceptible (CRO-S) E coli BSI was included. Primary outcome was desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) at day 30, with 50% probability of worse outcomes in the CRO-R group as the null hypothesis. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to reduce confounding. Results Notable differences between patients infected with CRO-R and CRO-S E coli BSI included the proportion with Pitt bacteremia score >= 4 (23% vs 15%, P = .079) and the median time to active antibiotic therapy (12 hours [interquartile range {IQR}, 1-35 hours] vs 1 hour [IQR, 0-6 hours]; P < .001). Unadjusted DOOR analyses indicated a 58% probability (95% confidence interval [CI], 52%-63%) for a worse clinical outcome in CRO-R versus CRO-S BSI. In the IPW-adjusted cohort, no difference was observed (54% [95% CI, 47%-61%]). Secondary outcomes included unadjusted and adjusted differences in the proportion of 30-day mortality between CRO-R and CRO-S BSIs (-5.3% [95% CI, -10.3% to -.4%] and -1.8 [95% CI, -6.7% to 3.2%], respectively), postculture median length of stay (8 days [IQR, 5-13 days] vs 6 days [IQR, 4-9 days]; P < .001), and incident admission to a long-term care facility (22% vs 12%, P = .045). Conclusions Patients with CRO-R E coli BSI generally have poorer outcomes compared to patients infected with CRO-S E coli BSI, even after adjusting for important confounders.

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

4.4
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