Evidence Hub

Clinical characteristics of respiratory tract infection caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae in immunocompromised patients: a retrospective cohort study

Ya-Hui Liu, Lin Huang, Jing Cai, Hai-Xing Zhu, Jun Yu Li, Youchao Yu, Yumin Xu, Guo-Chao Shi et al.

Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, 2023

400 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

Purpose With advancements in medical technology and the growth of an aging society, the number of immunocompromised patients has increased progressively. Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae) is one of the most common opportunistic pathogens, causing a severe disease burden. We aimed to further clarify the differences in respiratory tract K. pneumoniae infections between immunocompromised and immunocompetent populations. Methods We retrospectively compared cases of respiratory tract K. pneumoniae infection in immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients admitted to Ruijin Hospital in Shanghai between January 2019 and August 2020 to clarify the differences between the two groups. Results We enrolled 400 immunocompromised patients and 386 immunocompetent patients. Compared to the immunocompetent group, immunocompromised patients were more likely to develop bacteremia and shock and to require mechanical ventilation support during hospitalization. Immunocompromised patients also had a greater probability of polymicrobial infection and a higher rate of antibacterial resistance to carbapenem, which resulted in a higher intensive care unit admission rate, 30-day case fatality rate (CFR), and 6-month CFR. Multivariate analysis indicated that immunocompromised patients with respiratory diseases (odds ratio [OR], 2.189; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.103-4.344; P = 0.025) and cardiovascular diseases (OR, 2.008; 95% CI, 1.055-3.822; P = 0.034), using mechanical ventilation (OR,…

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: 400 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