ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2013
Difficult-to-detect carbapenem-resistant IMP13-producing P. aeruginosa: experience feedback concerning a cluster of urinary tract infections at a surgical clinic in France.
Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outbreak investigations after identifying carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Pooled it
- Correlation Analysis Between Multi-Drug Resistance Phenotype and Virulence Factor Expression of ClinicalCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
- Pseudomonas aeruginosa in French hospitals between 2001 and 2011: back to susceptibility.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe report a carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa clone responsible for a cluster of urinary tract infections in elderly surgery patients, diagnosed during a three-month period in a 59-bed surgical clinic.
findingsThe clonal nature of the cluster was established by molecular study of the P. aeruginosa isolates (PFGE and MLST). Despite an MIC of imipenem in the susceptibility range for two isolates, all were metallo-β-lactamase-producers (IMP13-type, clone ST621). We conducted a review of the medical and surgical procedures. We tested water delivered into the clinic and urological devices for the presence of the epidemic strain. The hygiene nurse observed hygiene practices. A week after the implementation of barrier precautions around the fourth infected patient, we studied the extent to which the patients hospitalised were colonised to assess whether the spread of the epidemic strain had been controlled.
conclusions1/ Our findings indicate the difficulties in the detection of the metallo-β-lactamase in this clone, that resulted in the alert being delayed. 2/ Unlike most investigations of UTI outbreaks described in urology wards, we did not detect any contaminated urological devices or water colonisation. 3/ Consistent with outbreaks involving the IMP-13 clone in critical care units, the observation of inadequate application of standard precautions argued for patient-to-patient transmission during urinary management of the urology patients. 4/ The implementation of barrier precautions around infected patients resulted in control of the spread of the epidemic clone. This report serves as an alert concerning a difficult-to-detect multidrug-resistant P. aeruginosa clone in elderly urology patients.
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.