Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34353332›Full record

ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2021

Secondary bacterial infections and antimicrobial resistance in COVID-19: comparative evaluation of pre-pandemic and pandemic-era, a retrospective single center study.

Mustafa Karataş, Melike Yaşar-Duman, Alper Tünger, Feriha Çilli, Şöhret Aydemir, Volkan Özenci

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Antibiotic Resistance during COVID-19: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Carbapenem-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  11. The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on ESBL-ProducingAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mustafa KarataşFaculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2464-0593
Melike Yaşar-DumanDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8913-2314
Alper TüngerDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1644-8833
Feriha ÇilliDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3993-3396
Şöhret Aydemir *Department of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8354-9100
Volkan Özenci *Division of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. volkan.ozenci@sll.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8069-4027
Ege University · TRKarolinska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn this study, we aimed to evaluate the epidemiology and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) patterns of bacterial pathogens in COVID-19 patients and to compare the results with control groups from the pre-pandemic and pandemic era.

methodsMicrobiological database records of all the COVID-19 diagnosed patients in the Ege University Hospital between March 15, 2020, and June 15, 2020, evaluated retrospectively. Patients who acquired secondary bacterial infections (SBIs) and bacterial co-infections were analyzed. Etiology and AMR data of the bacterial infections were collected. Results were also compared to control groups from pre-pandemic and pandemic era data.

resultsIn total, 4859 positive culture results from 3532 patients were analyzed. Fifty-two (3.59%) patients had 78 SBIs and 38 (2.62%) patients had 45 bacterial co-infections among 1447 COVID-19 patients. 22/85 (25.88%) patients died who had bacterial infections. The respiratory culture-positive sample rate was 39.02% among all culture-positive samples in the COVID-19 group. There was a significant decrease in extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales (8.94%) compared to samples from the pre-pandemic (20.76%) and pandemic era (20.74%) (p = 0.001 for both comparisons). Interestingly, Acinetobacter baumannii was the main pathogen in the respiratory infections of COVID-19 patients (9.76%) and the rate was significantly higher than pre-pandemic (3.49%, p < 0.002) and pandemic era control groups (3.11%, p < 0.001).

conclusionDue to the low frequency of SBIs reported during the ongoing pandemic, a more careful and targeted antimicrobial prescription should be taken. While patients with COVID-19 had lower levels of ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, the frequency of multidrug-resistant (MDR) A. baumannii is higher.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsChildChild, PreschoolCoinfectionCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingDrug Resistance, BacterialFemaleHumansInfantMaleAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial resistanceCo-infectionsCOVID-19Secondary bacterial infections

Identifiers

PMID34353332
PMCPMC8340813
OpenAlexW3131940561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.