Journals / Şişli Etfal Hastanesi Tıp Bülteni / 2021 / Cilt: 55 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of Risk Factors and Outcomes in Carbapenem-Resistant and Carbapenem-Susceptible Gram-Negative Bacteremia

Pages
398–404
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Therefore, patients should be evaluated for risk factors in predicting CR-GNB and treatment for resistant pathogens should be applied in appropriate patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background: Carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteremia (CR-GNB) is seen with increasing frequency and result in high mortality.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The study was conducted as a retrospective observational comparative case series between June 2016 and November 2017 in Şişli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, patients should be evaluated for risk factors in predicting CR-GNB and treatment for resistant pathogens should be applied in appropriate patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteremia (CR-GNB) is seen with increasing frequency and result in high mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the risk factors and results of carbapenem-resistant and carbapenem-susceptible Gram-negative bacteremia and to determine the factors related to mortality. Methods: The study was conducted as a retrospective observational comparative case series between June 2016 and November 2017 in Şişli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital. The patients were divided into two groups as carbapenem-susceptible and carbapenem-resistant according to antibiotic susceptibility data of blood cultures. The risk factors for the development of carbapenem resistance, length of hospital stay, mortality rates, and mortality related factors were investigated between these two groups. Results: Two hundred and eleven cases were included in the study. Of these cases, 54 were resistant to carbapenem and 157 were susceptible to carbapenem. Mortality occurred in 60 (28.4%) patients. The 14 and 28 day mortality rates of patients with carbapenem resistance were significantly higher than those without carbapenem resistance. There was no statistically significant difference between two groups in length of stay in the hospital after bacteremia. Pittsburgh bacteremia score, cardiovascular disease, urinary catheterization, and inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy were the most significant risk factors for mortality. Conclusions: Carbapenem resistance is associated with increased mortality and inappropriate empirical antibiotic treatment increases mortality. Therefore, patients should be evaluated for risk factors in predicting CR-GNB and treatment for resistant pathogens should be applied in appropriate patients.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇETİN, S., DÖKMETAŞ, İ., HAMİDİ, A. A., BAYRAKTAR, B., GÜNDÜZ, A., SEVGİ, D. Y. (2021). Comparison of Risk Factors and Outcomes in Carbapenem-Resistant and Carbapenem-Susceptible Gram-Negative Bacteremia. Şişli Etfal Hastanesi Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 55 - Sayı: 3, 398–404. https://ajindex.com/articles/363374

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. de Kraker ME, Jarlier V, Monen JC, Heuer OE, van de Sande N, Grundmann H. The changing epidemiology of bacteraemias in Europe: trends from the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System. Clin Microbiol Infect 2013
  2. 860–8. [CrossRef] 2. Laupland KB. Incidence of bloodstream infection: a review of population-based studies. Clin Microbiol Infect 2013
  3. 492–500. [CrossRef] 3. Nordmann P, Naas T, Poirel L. Global spread of Carbapenemaseproducing Enterobacteriaceae. Emerg Infect Dis 2011
  4. 1791–8. [CrossRef] 4. Doi Y. Ertapenem, Imipenem, Meropenem, Doripenem, and Aztreonam. In: Bennett JE, editor. Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 9th ed. Elseviver: 2020. p. 285–90. 5. Thaden JT, Pogue JM, Kaye KS. Role of newer and re-emerging older agents in the treatment of infections caused by carbapenemresistant Enterobacteriaceae. Virulence 2017
  5. 403–16. [CrossRef] 6. Bartsch SM, McKinnell JA, Mueller LE, Miller LG, Gohil SK, Huang SS, et al. Potential economic burden of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) in the United States. Clin Microbiol Infect 2017
  6. e9–48.e16. [CrossRef] 7. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States. 2013. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/pdf/ar-threats-2013- 508.pdf. Accessed Aug 05, 2021. 8. World Health Organization. Global priority list of antibioticresistant bacteria to guide research, discovery, and development of new antibiotics. 2017
  7. Available at: https://www.who.int/ medicines/publications/global-priority-list-antibiotic-resistantbacteria/en/. Accessed Aug 05, 2021. 9. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987
  8. 373–83. [CrossRef] 10. Henderson H, Luterbach CL, Cober E, Richter SS, Salata RA, Kalayjian RC, et al. The pitt bacteremia score predicts mortality in nonbacteremic infections. Clin Infect Dis 2020
  9. 1826–33. [CrossRef] 11. Martin GS, Mannino DM, Eaton S, Moss M. The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med 2003
  10. 1546–54. [CrossRef] 12. de Maio Carrilho CM, de Oliveira LM, Gaudereto J, Perozin JS, Urbano MR, Camargo CH, et al. A prospective study of treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections and risk factors associated with outcome. BMC Infect Dis 2016
  11. [CrossRef] 13. Doi Y, Paterson DL. Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae.