Evidence Hub

Spontaneous bacteremia and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis share similar prognosis in patients with cirrhosis: a cohort study

Marciano S, Dirchwolf M, Bermudez CS, Sobenko N, Haddad L, Genre Bert F, Barcán L, Smud A et al.

Hepatology international, 2018

55 participants · 20 citations

Abstract

Background and aims: Spontaneous bacteremia is a poorly characterized infection in patients with cirrhosis. We compared the incidence of mortality and acute kidney injury in patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and spontaneous bacteremia, and identified risk factors for mortality and acute kidney injury in patients with spontaneous bacteremia.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with cirrhosis and spontaneous bacteremia or spontaneous bacterial peritonitis from 2008 to 2016 at Hospital Italiano, Buenos Aires. We compared the cumulative incidence of acute kidney injury and death between the two infections, and identified risk factors for these outcomes in patients with spontaneous bacteremia.

Results: Seventy-one patients with spontaneous bacteremia and 55 patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis were included. Most infections were nosocomial. Overall, 26% of bacteria were resistant and 11% multi-resistant. We found no significant association between acute kidney injury [subhazard ratio (sHR) 1.05 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.67-1.63, p = 0.83)] or death [sHR 1.15 (95% CI 0.60-2.20, p = 0.68)] and type of spontaneous infection in multivariate analyses adjusting for basal Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. In patients with spontaneous bacteremia, baseline MELD score was independently associated with acute kidney injury [sHR 1.07 (95% CI 1.03-1.11, p = 0.001)] and death [sHR 1.07 (95% CI 1.02-1.15, p = 0.03)].…

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: 55 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