Evidence Hub

Treatment of Stenotrophomonas malthophilia bloodstream infections from guidance to real life: multicenter retrospective cohort study

Pascale R, Maccaro A, Gallo M, Giovannenze F, Tontodonati M, Chiappetta S, Pagani G, Bartoletti M et al.

Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy, 2025

64 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Infectious Diseases Society of America guidance recommend the use of combination therapy (CT) for the treatment of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (SM) infections. The aims of our study are to describe therapeutical management of patients with SM bloodstream infections (SM-BSI) and to evaluate the impact of antibiotic CT compared to monotherapy (MT) on 30-days mortality.

METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective study of patients with SM-BSI hospitalized in 14 centers between January 2021-December 2022. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the risk factors for 30-days mortality including CT therapy as main exposure. To address potential confounding, an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used.

RESULTS: 64 patients with SM-BSI analyzed: 32 (50 %) male, median age of 65 years (IQR: 55-75). MT was administered in 49 patients (76.6 %) and CT in 15 (23.4 %). Trimethoprim/sulphamethoxazole was the most frequent drug used in both MT and CT. Levofloxacin was the second preferred MT. Patients receiving CT were more frequently admitted in ICU with septic shock at BSI onset. At multivariable analysis, septic shock (OR: 7.65, 95 %CI: 1.32-44.48, p = 0.023) and haematological malignancies (OR: 6.82, 95 %CI: 1.50-30.88, p = 0.013) were independent risk factors for 30-day mortality. Using an IPTW-based multivariable analysis, CT showed a non-significant trend toward a protective effect on 30-day mortality (OR: 0.88; 95 % CI:…

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: 64 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