ArticleAnnals of thoracic medicine2010
Acinetobacter pneumonia: Is the outcome different from the pneumonias caused by other agents.
Article in Annals of thoracic medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Appropriate initial antibiotic therapy in hospitalized patients with gram-negative infections: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2015Pooled it
- Prognostic differences between VAP from Acinetobacter baumanii and VAP from other microorganisms.Translational medicine @ UniSa · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe principal aim of the present study was to determine whether Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia differs from hospital-acquired pneumonias (HAPs) caused by other agents with respect to therapeutic success and survival rate.
methodsThis study includes 140 adult patients diagnosed with HAPs caused by identified etiologic agents between March 2005 and February 2006. These patients were divided into two groups according to the agent responsible for their infection (Acinetobacter spp. [n = 63] or non-Acinetobacter spp. [n = 77]). The groups were compared in terms of risk factors, therapeutic success and six-week survival rates.
resultsPrevious antibiotic use and the risk of aspiration were independent factors responsible for the development of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia. Hypoalbuminemia, steroid use and the use of a mechanical ventilator were determined to be mortality-associated independent risk factors for Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia. The clinical success rate at the end of therapy was 41.6% and, at the sixth week, the survival rate was 35% among patients in whom Acinetobacter spp. was the causative agent. Conversely, in the control group, these values were 43 and 32%, respectively (P > 0.05). We found that the use of the appropriate antibiotics for the treatment of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia was an important factor in survival (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe outcomes of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia do not differ from HAPs associated with non-Acinetobacter spp. in terms of therapeutic success and survival rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.