Evidence Hub

Retrospective analysis of bacteremia because of Enterobacter cloacae compared with Escherichia coli bacteremia

Juanjuan D, Zhiyong Z, Xiaoju L, Yali X, Xihai Z, Zhenzhen L

International journal of clinical practice, 2007

52 participants

Abstract

A total of 52 patients of Enterobacter cloacae bacteremia from a University hospital during the period from January 2000 to June 2005 were analysed and compared with a reference group comprising 52 patients of Escherichia coli bacteremia. Overall, E. cloacae ranked the tenth in all pathogens of bacteremia accounting for 2.8% of the total patients. Although the incidence of E. cloacae bacteremia was low, the attributable mortality rate till achieved 13.5%. Most patients (86.5%) with E. cloacae bacteremia were hospital-acquired. The overwhelming majority of patients (92.3%) were men, while almost half of the patients (48.1%) were from the Department of Urological Surgery with underlying diseases such as urinal obstruction, kidney transplantation and kidney tumours. Possible risks factors associated with E. cloacae bacteremia included immunocompromised status, long-term hospitalisation and invasive procedures or surgeries. E. cloacae bacteremia significantly differed from E. coli bacteremia in a number of clinical aspects, including underlying diseases, portal of entry, infection type, risks factors, laboratory findings and appropriateness of empirical antibiotic therapy. Besides the high prevalence of resistance to cephalosporins, most E. cloacae blood isolates were also resistant to ciprofloxacin (resistance rate, 67.3%), gentamicin (73.1%) and tobramycin (73.1%). Based on the findings of the present study, E. cloacae is probably an important pathogen of bacteremia occurring…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 52 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free