ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Genomic sequencing surveillance of patients colonized with vancomycin-resistant
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Vancomycin-resistant enterococcal (VRE) infections pose significant challenges in healthcare. Transmission dynamics of VRE are complex, often involving patient colonization and subsequent transmission through various healthcare-associated vectors. We utilized a whole genome sequencing (WGS) surveillance program at our institution to better understand the contribution of clinical and colonizing isolates to VRE transmission. Methods: We performed whole genome sequencing on 352 VRE clinical isolates collected over 34 months and 891 rectal screening isolates collected over a 9-month nested period, and used single nucleotide polymorphisms to assess relatedness. We then performed a geo-temporal transmission analysis considering both clinical and rectal screening isolates compared with clinical isolates alone, and calculated 30-day outcomes of patients. Results: VRE rectal carriage constituted 87.3% of VRE acquisition, with an average monthly acquisition rate of 7.6 per 1000 patient days. We identified 185 genetically related clusters containing 2-42 isolates and encompassing 69.6% of all isolates in the dataset. The inclusion of rectal swab isolates increased the detection of clinical isolate clusters (from 53% to 67%, P<0.01). Geo-temporal analysis identified hotspot locations of VRE transmission. Patients with clinical VRE isolates that were closely related to previously sampled rectal swab isolates experienced 30-day ICU admission (17.5%), hospital readmission (9.2%), and death (13.3%). Conclusions: Our findings describe the high burden of VRE transmission at our hospital and shed light on the importance of using WGS surveillance of both clinical and rectal screening isolates to better understand the transmission of this pathogen. This study highlights the potential utility of incorporating WGS surveillance of VRE into routine hospital practice for improving infection prevention and patient safety.
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.