Evidence Hub

Treatment, clinical outcomes, and predictors of mortality among a national cohort of hospitalized patients with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infection

H. J. Appaneal, V. Lopes, K. LaPlante, A. Caffrey

Public Health, 2022

3,891 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To analyze treatment, clinical outcomes, and predictors of inpatient mortality in hospitalized patients with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infection.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

We included patients admitted to Veterans Affairs hospitals nationally with S. maltophilia cultures and treatment from 2010 to 2019. We described patient and clinical characteristics, antibiotic treatment, and clinical outcomes. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were used to evaluate predictors of inpatient mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 3891 hospitalized patients treated for an S. maltophilia infection, of which 13.7% died during admission. The most common antibiotic agents were piperacillin/tazobactam (39.7%), sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim (23.3%), and levofloxacin (23.2%). Combination therapy was used in 16.6% of patients. Independent predictors of inpatient mortality identified in multivariable analysis included the following: presence of current acute respiratory failure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.63-6.19), shock (aOR 3.00, 95% CI 2.31-3.90), acute renal failure (aOR 2.06, 95% CI 1.64-2.60), and septicemia (aOR 1.90, 95% CI 1.49-2.42), age 65 years and older (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.07-3.94, reference age 18-49 years), hospital-acquired infection (aOR 1.87, 95% CI 1.48-2.37), Black (aOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.21-2.06) and other races (aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.41-2.41, reference White), liver disease (aOR 1.51, 95% CI 1.02-2.22),…

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: 3,891 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