Evidence Hub

Systematic review on epidemiology of Escherichia coli in bloodstream infection of patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Fatemeh Janani, Pouria Azami, Mohammad Ghenaatpisheh Sanani, Khadijeh Bamneshin

GERMS, 2024

4 citations

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the epidemiology of Escherichia coli in bloodstream infections (BSI) of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients. Methods: For a comprehensive search of studies that reported the prevalence of E. coli and antibiotic resistance in bloodstream infections from 2000 to January 1, 2024, databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. The main keywords used were: Escherichia coli, epidemiology, bloodstream infection, microbial resistance, antibiotic resistance, hematopoietic malignancy, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. After applying eligibility criteria, and quality assessment of studies, data analysis was done by comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) software. Results: The prevalence of bacterial bloodstream infections amongst different studies varied between 8–51%. Also, bloodstream infections caused by E. coli varied between 2.5–57%. Prevalence of extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) of Escherichia coli in bloodstream infections varied between 15–80%. As well, the mortality rate caused by Escherichia coli strains in bloodstream infection varied between 6.7–27.3%. Resistance to ciprofloxacin, cefepime, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, was reported to be the highest (prevalence of 100%), and the lowest was against amikacin, with a prevalence between 13-38%. Conclusions: The high prevalence of Escherichia coli-related BSI, and subsequent mortality,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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