4.7 Article

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Endocarditis Due to Non-HACEK Gram-Negative Bacilli: Data from the Prospective Multicenter Italian Endocarditis Study Cohort

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.02208-17

关键词

Gram-negative bacteria; infective endocarditis; multidrug resistance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study was to investigate predisposing factors and outcomes of infective endocarditis (IE) caused by non-HACEK Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) in a contemporary multicenter cohort. Patients with IE due to GNB, prospectively observed in 26 Italian centers from 2004 to 2011, were analyzed. Using a casecontrol design, each case was compared to three age- and sex-matched controls with IE due to other etiologies. Logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for IE due to GNB. Factors associated with early and late mortality were assessed by Cox regression analysis. The study group comprised 58 patients with IE due to GNB. We found that Escherichia coli was the most common pathogen, followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae. The genitourinary tract as a source of infection (odds ratio [OR], 13.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.63 to 39.93; P < 0.001), immunosuppression (OR, 5.16; 95% CI, 1.60 to 16.24; P = 0.006), and the presence of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.55 to 8.20; P = 0.003) were factors independently associated with IE due to GNB. In-hospital mortality was 13.8%, and mortality rose to 30.6% at 1 year. A multidrug-resistant (MDR) etiology was associated with in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 21.849; 95% CI, 2.672 to 178.683; P = 0.004) and 1-year mortality (HR, 4.408; 95% CI, 1.581 to 12.287; P = 0.005). We conclude that the presence of a genitourinary focus, immunosuppressive therapy, and an indwelling CIED are factors associated with IE due to GNB. MDR etiology is the major determinant of in-hospital and long-term mortality.

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