ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2025
Clinical and Microbiological Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients With Monomicrobial Versus Polymicrobial Bacterial Bloodstream Infections: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The impact of polymicrobial bloodstream infections in critically ill patients is uncertain. Methods: This observational cohort study included patients admitted to the ICU for ≥3d. We compared patients with monomicrobial versus polymicrobial (ie, ≥1 positive blood culture with ≥2 isolates) bloodstream infections. Inverse-probability weighting and covariate-adjusted generalized linear regression models were used to calculate adjusted differences in risks and means. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality from index culture. Secondary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality, microbiological failure, ECMO at 30 days, ARDS at 7 days, fever at 7 days, length of ICU and hospital stay. A separate analysis was performed excluding common skin commensals. Results: Between 03/2014 and 03/2024, 3197 patients were included in the overall and 1669 in the common commensal-free cohort. In the overall cohort, 90-day mortality occurred in 749 (28.3%, adjusted 28.3%) of 2648 patients in the monomicrobial group and 164 (29.9%, adjusted 31.1%) of 549 patients in the polymicrobial group (adjusted risk difference, 2.84% [95%CI, -1.19-6.88]). All-cause 30-day mortality, microbiological failure (adjusted, 4.67% vs 6.56%), initiation of ECMO (adjusted, 3.65% vs 2.99%), ARDS (adjusted, 17.4% vs 15.7%), fever (adjusted, 19.1% vs 20.4%), length of ICU stay (adjusted means, 19.6 vs 19.8 days), and length of hospital stay (adjusted means, 42.6 vs 45.2 days) did not differ significantly between the groups. Outcomes did not differ in the common commensal-free cohort. Conclusions: Clinical and microbiological outcomes were comparable between critically ill patients with monomicrobial and polymicrobial bloodstream infections, regardless of whether suspected contaminants were excluded.
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.