Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38133795›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2024

Clinical outcomes of intensive care unit patients infected with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria treated with ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam.

Camila Soares Neves, Líbia Cristina Rocha Vilela Moura, Jailton Lobo Da Costa Lima, Maria Amélia Vieira Maciel

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Camila Soares NevesCenter for Medical Sciences/UFPE, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. camila.neves@ufpe.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5477-4296
Líbia Cristina Rocha Vilela MouraCenter for Medical Sciences/UFPE, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4161-8355
Jailton Lobo Da Costa LimaCenter for Medical Sciences/UFPE, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5500-1129
Maria Amélia Vieira MacielCenter for Medical Sciences/UFPE, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4220-6889
Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In intensive care units (ICUs), infection rates range from 18 to 54%, which is five to ten times higher than those observed in other hospital units, with a mortality rate of 9% to 60%. In recent decades, the susceptibility pattern has changed and Gram-Negative Bacteria (GNB) have become a threat due to their high frequency of multidrug resistance associated with a scarcity of therapeutic options. However, the drugs Ceftolozane/Tazobactam (C/T) and Ceftazidime/Avibactam (C/A) are demonstrating good clinical and microbiological response in the treatment of severe nosocomial infections. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the clinical outcome of patients with severe infections caused by Multidrug-Resistant (MDR) GNB treated with C/T and C/A. Our study evaluates a total of 131 patients who received treatment with C/T and C/A due to infections caused by MDR GNB within the period from 2018 to 2021. The main infections were urinary tract (46,6%) and respiratory (26,7%) infections. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the prevailing agent in the sample evaluation (34.3%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (30,1%). About 54,9% of patients showed a favorable response, with culture negativation in 66,4% of the samples, with no discrepancy in negativations when comparing ages: 67,7% in young and 66% in elderly patients. Among the patients, 62,6% received monotherapy with C/T and C/A with a better response observed with monotherapy compared to combination therapy (58,6% vs 41,4%). The overall mortality rate was 45%, with MDR GNB infections responsible for 33,9% of these deaths, and the others (66,1%) due to factors such as oncological, hematological, and degenerative neurological diseases. In regards to hematological aspect, 35,1% of patients showed changes, with 28,2% of them presenting anemia, 4,5% thrombocytopenia, and 2,5% thrombocytosis. Concerning the use of invasive devices, higher mortality was observed in patients on mechanical ventilation (52%). In this manner, it was possible to observe that therapy with C/T and C/A yielded a favorable clinical outcome in patients with severe infections caused by MDR GNB in the study. These drugs also demonstrated good tolerability regardless of age or the presence of preexisting comorbidities and were deemed safe when assessing adverse effects. Our data also demonstrate the importance of determining the mechanism of resistance to carbapenems so that these drugs can be used more effectively and rationally.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAzabicyclo CompoundsCeftazidimeAgedCephalosporinsDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialGram-Negative BacteriaHumansIntensive Care UnitsMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPseudomonas aeruginosaTazobactamAnti-Bacterial AgentsavibactamAzabicyclo CompoundsCeftazidimeceftolozaneceftolozane, tazobactam drug combinationCephalosporinsTazobactamExtended-spectrum β-lactamasesGram-negative bacteriaKlebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemasesMultidrug-resistant bacteria

Identifiers

PMID38133795
PMCPMC10920575
OpenAlexW4390109854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.