Evidence Hub

The Other Face of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in Hospitalized Patients: Insights from over Two Decades of Non-Cystic Fibrosis Cohort

M. J. Alwazzeh, A. Alnimr, S. Alwarthan, Mashael Alhajri, Jumanah N. Algazaq, B. Alshehail, Abdullah Alnasser, A. Alwail et al.

Antibiotics, 2026

539 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is an intrinsically multidrug-resistant, biofilm- forming, non-fermenter increasingly implicated in hospital-acquired infections. Evidence from non-cystic fibrosis populations, especially in the Middle East, remains sparse. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study at a tertiary academic center (Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia) spanning 1 May 2001–30 April 2023. Hospitalized adults (≥18 years) with culture-confirmed, clinically diagnosed S. maltophilia infection and ≥72 h of antibiotic therapy were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality (14-day, 30-day, 1-year). Secondary outcomes were clinical response, microbiological eradication, and infection recurrence. Predictors of 30-day mortality were assessed using multivariable logistic regression; 14-day mortality was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier/log-rank according to susceptibility-guided versus alternative therapy. Results: Of 539 patients with positive cultures, 436 met the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 60.5 ± 19.3 years; 62.2% were male. Most infections were hospital-acquired (92.9%); pneumonia composed 64.7% and bloodstream infection 15.4%. Polymicrobial growth occurred in 55.5% (predominantly Gram-negative co-isolation). Susceptibility was 95.1% to trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole, 76.4% to levofloxacin, and 43.6% to ceftazidime. Mortality at 14 days, 30 days, and 1 year was 22.8%, 37.9%, and 57.2%, respectively. On multivariable modelling, intensive care…

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: 539 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