ArticleJAMA network open2026
Mortality After Piperacillin-Tazobactam-Resistant vs -Susceptible Bloodstream Infection.
Article in JAMA network open, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Use of piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP) as treatment for bloodstream infections (BSIs) has increased over time in Europe, as has antimicrobial resistance to TZP in some European countries. Objective: To evaluate mortality associated with TZP-resistant BSIs in the Danish health care system. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, data collected in near real time were obtained from Danish national health registers from November 15, 2018, through November 21, 2024. Participants were patients aged 18 years or older with monomicrobial Escherichia coli or Klebsiella pneumoniae BSI, restricted to the first positive (index) blood culture with a TZP-susceptibility test result during the follow-up period. Exposures: E coli or K pneumoniae BSI and a TZP susceptibility test classified as TZP resistant or TZP susceptible. Main Outcome and Measures: Thirty-day mortality hazard ratios (HRs) for BSIs with TZP-resistant vs TZP-susceptible bacteria were estimated from the index date (blood culture) until death, emigration, or end of the observation period. Mortality was drawn from Danish national health registers, with no restriction on in-hospital or postdischarge mortality. Univariable and multivariable models adjusted a priori for self-reported gender, age, comorbidity, year, length of hospital stay until BSI, total length of inpatient stays in the prior year, and BSI in the prior 6 months with species other than that in the index culture. Results: The study population included 34 379 patients (median overall age, 76 years [IQR, 66-83 years]; 51.5% male). Among 28 649 patients (81.9%) with E coli BSI, 1689 (5.9%) had a TZP-resistant BSI; among 6314 patients (18.1%) with K pneumoniae BSI, 597 (9.5%) had a TZP-resistant BSI. There was no loss to follow-up, and about 1% of participants were right-censored by the end of the observation period (E coli: 343 [1.2%]; K pneumoniae, 88 [1.4%]). Mortality was similar for patients with TZP-resistant and TZP-susceptible BSI after adjusting for baseline risk factors (E coli: crude HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.08-1.38]; adjusted HR [AHR], 1.09 [95% CI, 0.94-1.27]; K pneumoniae: crude HR, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.05-1.52]; AHR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.94-1.41]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with monomicrobial E coli or K pneumoniae BSI, there was no significant difference in mortality for patients with BSI caused by TZP-resistant vs TZP-susceptible bacteria after adjustment for baseline risk factors. The result is important given increasing TZP resistance in Denmark and other countries.
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.