Mortality-related risk factors of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infection with focus on antimicrobial regimens optimization: a real-world retrospective study in China.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES BMC Infectious Diseases Pub Date : 2025-01-23 DOI:10.1186/s12879-025-10454-z
Sheng Deng, Jinglan Chen, Pengxiang Zhou, Qin Hu
{"title":"Mortality-related risk factors of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infection with focus on antimicrobial regimens optimization: a real-world retrospective study in China.","authors":"Sheng Deng, Jinglan Chen, Pengxiang Zhou, Qin Hu","doi":"10.1186/s12879-025-10454-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the mortality-related risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infection in hospitalized patients and to compare the clinical efficacy of different antimicrobial regimen.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were retrospectively collected from a 3,500-bed regional medical center between January 2021 and June 2022. Mortality-related risk factors were analyzed by the Cox proportional regression model for multivariate analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>120 patients were included and the all-cause mortality was 20.8% (25/120). Multivariate analysis showed that age (HR = 1.035, 95%CI: 1.002-1.070, P = 0.036), SOFA score (HR = 1.169,95%CI: 1.066-1.281, P = 0.001), central venous catheter (HR = 3.858, 95%CI: 1.411-10.547, P = 0.009), the length of hospital stay (HR = 0.868, 95% CI: 0.806-0.936, P = 0.000) and combination therapy (HR = 3.152, 95%CI: 1.205-8.245, P = 0.019) were independent mortality risk factors after CRE infection. All patients received definitive therapy and 65.0% (78/120) received sensitive drug treatment. Among those 65.4% (51/78) received combination therapy and 34.6% (27/78) received monotherapy. Subgroup analysis of the non-sepsis group showed significantly lower mortality in monotherapy than in combination therapy (0% versus 22.2%, P = 0.034). Patients who received carbapenem-containing therapy had significantly higher mortality than those who received carbapenem-sparing therapy (31.3% versus 13.9%, P = 0.022). CAZ-AVI-containing therapy presented a lower mortality (19.0%) and a higher 7-day microbiological clearance (47.6%) compared to other antimicrobial regimens, but there were no statistical significance (P>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with older age, higher SOFA score, central venous catheter, shorter hospital stay after CRE infection may had poor outcomes. Since patients with non-sepsis have a lower mortality rate from monotherapy, combination antibiotic treatment should not be routinely recommended. Patients who received CAZ-AVI-containing therapy presented a lower mortality compared to other antimicrobial regimens without statistical significance, further larger sample size is needed for verification.</p>","PeriodicalId":8981,"journal":{"name":"BMC Infectious Diseases","volume":"25 1","pages":"110"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11761787/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-025-10454-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the mortality-related risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infection in hospitalized patients and to compare the clinical efficacy of different antimicrobial regimen.

Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from a 3,500-bed regional medical center between January 2021 and June 2022. Mortality-related risk factors were analyzed by the Cox proportional regression model for multivariate analysis.

Results: 120 patients were included and the all-cause mortality was 20.8% (25/120). Multivariate analysis showed that age (HR = 1.035, 95%CI: 1.002-1.070, P = 0.036), SOFA score (HR = 1.169,95%CI: 1.066-1.281, P = 0.001), central venous catheter (HR = 3.858, 95%CI: 1.411-10.547, P = 0.009), the length of hospital stay (HR = 0.868, 95% CI: 0.806-0.936, P = 0.000) and combination therapy (HR = 3.152, 95%CI: 1.205-8.245, P = 0.019) were independent mortality risk factors after CRE infection. All patients received definitive therapy and 65.0% (78/120) received sensitive drug treatment. Among those 65.4% (51/78) received combination therapy and 34.6% (27/78) received monotherapy. Subgroup analysis of the non-sepsis group showed significantly lower mortality in monotherapy than in combination therapy (0% versus 22.2%, P = 0.034). Patients who received carbapenem-containing therapy had significantly higher mortality than those who received carbapenem-sparing therapy (31.3% versus 13.9%, P = 0.022). CAZ-AVI-containing therapy presented a lower mortality (19.0%) and a higher 7-day microbiological clearance (47.6%) compared to other antimicrobial regimens, but there were no statistical significance (P>0.05).

Conclusions: Patients with older age, higher SOFA score, central venous catheter, shorter hospital stay after CRE infection may had poor outcomes. Since patients with non-sepsis have a lower mortality rate from monotherapy, combination antibiotic treatment should not be routinely recommended. Patients who received CAZ-AVI-containing therapy presented a lower mortality compared to other antimicrobial regimens without statistical significance, further larger sample size is needed for verification.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
碳青霉烯耐药肠杆菌科感染的死亡率相关危险因素及抗菌方案优化:中国现实世界的回顾性研究
目的:探讨住院患者碳青霉烯耐药肠杆菌科(CRE)感染的死亡率相关危险因素,并比较不同抗菌方案的临床疗效。方法:回顾性收集2021年1月至2022年6月间一家拥有3500张床位的区域医疗中心的数据。采用Cox比例回归模型对死亡相关危险因素进行多因素分析。结果:共纳入120例患者,全因死亡率为20.8%(25/120)。多因素分析显示,年龄(HR = 1.035, 95%CI: 1.002 ~ 1.070, P = 0.036)、SOFA评分(HR = 1.169,95%CI: 1.066 ~ 1.281, P = 0.001)、中心静脉置管(HR = 3.858, 95%CI: 1.411 ~ 10.547, P = 0.009)、住院时间(HR = 0.868, 95%CI: 0.806 ~ 0.936, P = 0.000)和联合治疗(HR = 3.152, 95%CI: 1.205 ~ 8.245, P = 0.019)是CRE感染后的独立死亡危险因素。所有患者均接受了最终治疗,65.0%(78/120)患者接受了敏感药物治疗。其中65.4%(51/78)接受联合治疗,34.6%(27/78)接受单一治疗。非脓毒症组的亚组分析显示,单药组的死亡率明显低于联合治疗组(0%对22.2%,P = 0.034)。接受含碳青霉烯治疗的患者死亡率明显高于保留碳青霉烯治疗的患者(31.3% vs 13.9%, P = 0.022)。与其他抗菌素治疗方案相比,含caz - avi治疗的死亡率(19.0%)较低,7天微生物清除率(47.6%)较高,但差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:年龄较大、SOFA评分较高、中心静脉置管、CRE感染后住院时间较短的患者预后较差。由于非脓毒症患者单药治疗的死亡率较低,因此不应常规推荐联合抗生素治疗。接受含caz - avi治疗的患者死亡率较其他抗菌方案低,但无统计学意义,需要进一步扩大样本量进行验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Infectious Diseases
BMC Infectious Diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
860
审稿时长
3.3 months
期刊介绍: BMC Infectious Diseases is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of infectious and sexually transmitted diseases in humans, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
Mortality and its predictors among adolescents and adults on antiretroviral therapy in the era of test-and-treat, Ethiopia: a retrospective cohort study. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of selective COX-2 inhibitors and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Active surveillance of cytomegalovirus and pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19: risk assessment of high-dose steroids. Intraindividual variability in non-household contacts: a German longitudinal study, April 2020-December 2021. Spatial clustering and genetic diversity of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and associated diagnostic delays in Nairobi County, Kenya.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1