ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Multicenter, Observational Cohort Study Evaluating Third-Generation Cephalosporin Therapy for Bloodstream Infections Secondary to
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Intravenous Push and Intravenous Piggyback Ceftriaxone in Critically Ill Patients.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Mortality and Risk Factors of Death in Patients with AmpCInfection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Serratia endocarditis: antimicrobial management strategies and clinical outcomes.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2023Review
- Clinical Outcomes of Third-Generation Cephalosporin Definitive Therapy for Bloodstream Infections Due to Enterobacterales with Potential AmpC Induction: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Clinical Evaluation of Third-generation Cephalosporins As Definitive Therapy for Enterobacter spp. and Klebsiella aerogenes Bacteremia.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Observational
- Clinical outcome of wild-type AmpC-producing Enterobacterales infection in critically ill patients treated with β-lactams: a prospective multicenter study.Annals of intensive care · 2022Article
- Incidence and Predictors of Gram-Negative Bacilli in Hospitalized People Who Inject Drugs with Injection Drug Use-Attributable Infections.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021Article
- Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infection: Implications of Antimicrobial Resistance on Clinical Outcomes and Therapy.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Fluoroquinolone Versus Nonfluoroquinolone Treatment of Bloodstream Infections Caused by Chromosomally Mediated AmpC-Producing Enterobacteriaceae.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThere is debate on whether the use of third-generation cephalosporins (3GC) increases the risk of clinical failure in bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by chromosomally-mediated AmpC-producing Enterobacterales (CAE). This study evaluates the impact of definitive 3GC therapy versus other antibiotics on clinical outcomes in BSIs due to Enterobacter, Serratia, or Citrobacter species.
methodsThis multicenter, retrospective cohort study evaluated adult hospitalized patients with BSIs secondary to Enterobacter, Serratia, or Citrobacter species from 1 January 2006 to 1 September 2014. Definitive 3GC therapy was compared to definitive therapy with other non-3GC antibiotics. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression evaluated the impact of definitive 3GC on overall treatment failure (OTF) as a composite of in-hospital mortality, 30-day hospital readmission, or 90-day reinfection.
resultsA total of 381 patients from 18 institutions in the southeastern United States were enrolled. Common sources of BSIs were the urinary tract and central venous catheters (78 (20.5%) patients each). Definitive 3GC therapy was utilized in 65 (17.1%) patients. OTF occurred in 22/65 patients (33.9%) in the definitive 3GC group vs. 94/316 (29.8%) in the non-3GC group (p = 0.51). Individual components of OTF were comparable between groups. Risk of OTF was comparable with definitive 3GC therapy vs. definitive non-3GC therapy (aHR 0.93, 95% CI 0.51-1.72) in multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.
conclusionsThese outcomes suggest definitive 3GC therapy does not significantly alter the risk of poor clinical outcomes in the treatment of BSIs secondary to Enterobacter, Serratia, or Citrobacter species compared to other antimicrobial agents.
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.