Evidence Hub

Liver cirrhosis as a risk factor for mortality in a national cohort of patients with bacteremia

C. Kang, Jae-Hoon Song, D. Chung, K. Peck, J. Yeom, H. Ki, J. Son, J. Lee et al.

Journal of Infection, 2011

1,659 participants · 47 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical features and outcomes of bacteremia in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) and determine whether underlying LC is an independent risk factor for mortality in a population of patients with different underlying diseases.

METHODS

From the database of nationwide surveillance studies for bacteremia, data regarding bacteremia in patients with LC were analyzed and compared with those in patients with other diseases.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients with LC were compared with 1659 patients with other underlying diseases. As for the site of infection, intraabdominal infection was more frequent in the LC group (P < 0.001), while pneumonia, urinary tract bacteremia, and primary bacteremia were more prevalent in the other diseases group (all P < 0.05). Patients with LC were more likely to have Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteremia (20.1% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.018), but less likely to have coagulase-negative staphylococcal bacteremia (5.1% vs. 10.4%, P = 0.028). The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in the LC group compared to the other disease group (27.2% [53/195] vs. 20.3% [336/1659], P = 0.025). Multivariate analysis revealed underlying LC as a significant predictor for mortality (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.43-3.13; P < 0.001), along with old age, nosocomial acquisition, pneumonia, severe sepsis, and a higher Pitt bacteremia score.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality rate of patients with LC was significantly higher than that of patients…

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: 1,659 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