Evidence Hub

Epidemiology and risk factors for isolation of Escherichia coli producing CTX-M-type extended-spectrum β-lactamase in a large U.S. Medical Center

Hayakawa K, Gattu S, Marchaim D, Bhargava A, Palla M, Alshabani K, Gudur UM, Pulluru H et al.

Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2013

575 participants

Abstract

A case-case-control study was conducted to identify independent risk factors for recovery of Escherichia coli strains producing CTX-M-type extended-spectrum β-lactamases (CTX-M E. coli) within a large Southeastern Michigan medical center. Unique cases with isolation of ESBL-producing E. coli from February 2010 through July 2011 were analyzed by PCR for blaCTX-M, blaTEM, and blaSHV genes. Patients with CTX-M E. coli were compared to patients with E. coli strains not producing CTX-M-type ESBLs (non-CTX-M E. coli) and uninfected controls. Of 575 patients with ESBL-producing E. coli, 491 (85.4%) isolates contained a CTX-M ESBL gene. A total of 319 (84.6%) patients with CTX-M E. coli (282 [74.8%] CTX-M-15 type) were compared to 58 (15.4%) non-CTX-M E. coli patients and to uninfected controls. Independent risk factors for CTX-M E. coli isolation compared to non-CTX-M E. coli included male gender, impaired consciousness, H2 blocker use, immunosuppression, and exposure to penicillins and/or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Compared to uninfected controls, independent risk factors for isolation of CTX-M E. coli included presence of a urinary catheter, previous urinary tract infection, exposure to oxyimino-cephalosporins, dependent functional status, non-home residence, and multiple comorbid conditions. Within 48 h of admission, community-acquired CTX-M E. coli (n = 51 [16%]) and non-CTX-M E coli (n = 11 [19%]) strains were isolated from patients with no recent health care contacts.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 575 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