Evidence Hub

Evaluation of risk factors and treatment options associated with extra-urogenital Mycoplasma hominis infections

Xingwei Cao, Yuan-Li Tang, Yanping Xiao, Shumin Gu, Long-Hua Hu, Xinyu Liu, Y. Hang, Yunwei Zheng et al.

Frontiers in Medicine, 2026

32 participants

Abstract

Introduction This study aimed to analyze clinical risk factors and treatment outcomes of different antibiotic regimens for extra-urogenital Mycoplasma hominis (M. hominis) infections. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted among patients diagnosed with extra-urogenital M. hominis infections at a tertiary-care hospital in China from January 2018 to December 2024. Cox proportional hazards models and log-rank analysis were employed to identify independent risk factors and evaluate the clinical efficacy of antimicrobial therapeutic regimens. Results The study included 32 patients with extra-urogenital M. hominis infections. Risk factors significantly associated with poor prognosis included intensive care unit (ICU) admission (p = 0.027), central venous catheter placement (p = 0.049), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (p < 0.001), and tracheal intubation (p = 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified tracheal intubation as an independent predictor of mortality. Treatment with quinolones (levofloxacin, moxifloxacin) was associated with significant reduction in white blood cell count (WBC) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, indicating effective control of inflammation. Conclusion This study demonstrated that risk factors was significantly associated with prior ICU admission, tracheal intubation, SOFA score, and central venous catheter placement, with tracheal intubation identified as an independent risk factors. Quinolone antibiotics demonstrated…

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: 32 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