ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Clinical characteristics, antimicrobial resistance patterns, and outcomes of Corynebacterium bacteremia: a 15-year retrospective study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes of teicoplanin for Corynebacterium species bacteremia: A retrospective observational study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- The Pathogenesis, Clinical Features, and Treatment ofMicroorganisms · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCorynebacterium species are often regarded as blood culture contaminants, but they are increasingly recognized as true pathogens. However, their clinical significance, resistance patterns, and prognostic factors remain poorly defined. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, antimicrobial resistance profiles, and factors associated with true bacteremia compared with isolates considered contaminants, as well as all-cause mortality.
methodsWe conducted a 15-year retrospective cohort study of adults with at least one Corynebacterium-positive blood culture at a tertiary-care university hospital in southern Thailand (2009-2024). Species identification was performed using MALDI-TOF MS from 2017 onward. True bacteremia was defined by clinical and microbiologic criteria. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of true bacteremia, and Cox proportional hazards regression was applied to identify predictors of 30-day mortality.
resultsAmong the 437 patients, 192 (44%) were classified as having true bacteremia. Independent predictors included hematologic malignancy (aOR 3.75; 95% CI: 1.40-10.73), central venous catheter use (aOR 2.39; 95% CI: 1.49-3.84), non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (aOR 2.83; 95% CI: 1.11-7.66), and hypertension (aOR 1.92; 95% CI: 1.20-3.08). The 30-day all-cause mortality rate was significantly greater in true bacteremia patients (43.8% vs. 23.3%, p < 0.001). In the Cox proportional hazards model, hematologic malignancy (aHR 2.32, 95% CI 1.35-4.00) and central venous catheter use (aHR 2.34, 95% CI 1.46-3.74) were identified as independent predictors of 30-day mortality. C. striatum was the most common species (29.5%), highly resistant to penicillin (96.7%) and clindamycin (98.4%), but universally susceptible to vancomycin
conclusionNearly half of Corynebacterium-positive blood cultures represented true infections with high mortality. Vancomycin remains the most reliable empiric therapy. Species-level identification and susceptibility testing are essential for accurate diagnosis and management CLINICAL TRIAL: Not applicable.
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.