ArticleBMC infectious diseases2015
A retrospective study of the incidence, clinical characteristics, identification, and antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteremic isolates of Acinetobacter ursingii.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploratory Evaluation of Susceptibility Patterns of Clinical Isolates ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Acinetobacter ursingii peritonitis in a patient on peritoneal dialysis (PD): case report and literature review.BMC nephrology · 2024Review
- Microbiological characteristics and risk factors on prognosis associated withFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Catheter-related bloodstream infection due toThe Pan African medical journal · 2021Review
- Late-onset neonatal sepsis:BMJ case reports · 2019Article
- Both diet and Helicobacter pylori infection contribute to atherosclerosis in pre- and postmenopausal cynomolgus monkeys.PloS one · 2019Article
- A canine urinary tract infection representing the first clinical veterinary isolation ofNew microbes and new infections · 2018Article
- Clinical and Pathophysiological Overview of Acinetobacter Infections: a Century of Challenges.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcinetobacter ursingii bacteremia is rarely reported. We investigated the incidence and clinical features of A. ursingii bacteremia, performance of the identification system, and antimicrobial susceptibility of the isolates. Acinetobacter ursingii bacteremia patients were compared with A. baumannii bacteremia patients.
methodsIn this 9-year retrospective study, A. ursingii was identified using 16S rRNA and 16S-23S rRNA internal transcribed spacer sequence analysis. The performances of the Vitek 2, Phoenix, and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometer systems for identifying isolates were tested. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was used to determine the clonality of the isolates. The minimal inhibitory concentrations of the antimicrobials were determined using the Vitek 2 system.
resultsNineteen patients were identified. Acinetobacter ursingii was noted in 1.5-5.2 % of all Acinetobacter bacteremia cases. For the PFGE analysis, two isolates had smeared DNA, two had 93 % similarity, and 15 had similarity <80 %. Among 16 patients with complete medical records, 10 (62.5 %) had no identifiable source of A. ursingii bacteremia. Most patients (n = 12) had underlying malignant disease. Patients with A. ursingii bacteremia had lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores than those with A. baumannii bacteremia (median [interquartile range], 17.1 [10.0-24.7] vs. 24.9 [14.6-35.1]). Patients with A. ursingii bacteremia were also less likely admitted to the intensive care unit than patients with A. baumannii bacteremia (18.8 % vs 63.5 %, p value < 0.01). About half of the patients with A. ursingii (50.8 %) and A. baumannii bacteremia (62.5 %) had received inappropriate antimicrobial therapy within 48 h after bacteremia onset. However, patients with A. ursingii bacteremia had significantly lower 14-day (6.25 % vs 29.8 %, p value = 0.04) and 28-day mortality rates (6.25 % vs 37.3 %, p value = 0.02) than patients with A. baumannii bacteremia. Nine isolates (47.4 %) were correctly identified as A. ursingii and the other 10 isolates (52.6 %) were incorrectly identified as A. lwoffii by the Vitek 2 system. The Phoenix system incorrectly identified all 19 isolates. The MALDI-TOF mass spectrometer system correctly identified all 19 isolates. All the A. ursingii isolates were resistant or showed intermediate susceptibility to ceftriaxone and ceftazidime, but were susceptible to levofloxacin and imipenem.
conclusionsAcinetobacter ursingii is a rare pathogen that mostly caused primary bacteremia in patients with malignancies. Patients with A. ursingii bacteremia had significantly lower disease severity and mortality rates than patients with A. baumannii bacteremia.
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.