Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28742549›Full record

ArticleCritical care medicine2017

Readmissions for Recurrent Sepsis: New or Relapsed Infection?

Kimberley Marie DeMerle, Stephanie C Royer, Mark E Mikkelsen, Hallie C Prescott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Phage-induced protection against lethal bacterial reinfection.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Multidrug-Resistant Sepsis: A Critical Healthcare Challenge.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kimberley Marie DeMerle1Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 2Division of Hospital Medicine, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH. 3Department of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH. 4Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 5VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI.
Stephanie C Royer
Mark E Mikkelsen
Hallie C Prescott
University of Cincinnati · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USVA Center for Clinical Management Research · US

Funding

General pathways and personalized risk of morbidity after sepsisK08GM115859 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI PRESCOTT, HALLIE CHRISTINE · 2015 to 2018
$776k
NIGMS NIH HHS K08 GM115859
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSepsis hospitalizations are frequently followed by hospital readmissions, often for recurrent sepsis. However, it is unclear how often sepsis readmissions are for relapsed/recrudescent versus new infections. The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which 90-day readmissions for recurrent sepsis are due to infection of the same site and same pathogen as the initial episode.

designRetrospective cohort study.

settingUniversity of Michigan Health System. PATIENTS: All hospitalizations (May 15, 2013 to May 14, 2015) with a principal International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis of septicemia (038.x), severe sepsis (995.92), or septic shock (785.52), as well as all subsequent hospitalizations and sepsis readmissions within 90 days. We determined organism and site of sepsis through manual chart abstraction.

interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsWe identified 472 readmissions within 90 days of sepsis, of which 137 (29.1%) were for sepsis. In sepsis readmissions, the site and organisms were most commonly urinary (29.2%), gastrointestinal (20.4%), Gram negative (29.9%), Gram positive (16.8%), and culture negative (30.7%). Ninety-four readmissions (68.6%) were for infection at the same site as initial sepsis hospitalization. Nineteen percent of readmissions were confirmed to be same site and same organism. However, accounting for the uncertainty from culture-negative sepsis, as many as 53.2% of readmissions could plausibly due to infections with both the same organism and same site.

conclusionsOf the patients readmitted with sepsis within 90 days, two thirds had infection at the same site as their initial admission. Just 19% had infection confirmed to be from the same site and organism as the initial sepsis hospitalization. Half of readmissions were definitively for new infections, whereas an additional 34% were unclear since cultures were negative in one of the hospitalizations.

Indexed as

AgedCohort StudiesFemaleGastrointestinal DiseasesHospital MortalityHumansMaleMichiganMiddle AgedPatient ReadmissionRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesSepsisUrinary Tract Infections

Identifiers

PMID28742549
PMCPMC5600690
OpenAlexW2741058012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.