Evidence Hub

A case of Helicobacter cinaedi pleuritis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis diagnosed by simultaneous-onset bacteremia

Yamamoto K, Ono D, Nozaki Y, Nishida Y, Sakai J, Mimura K, Terao M, Hasegawa H et al.

IDCases, 2025

1 citation

Abstract

A 42-year-old man undergoing peritoneal dialysis due to a chronic kidney disease of unknown etiology complained of fever and chills. Oral levofloxacin was started, but the symptoms did not improve. He was admitted, and the levofloxacin was switched to intravenous ciprofloxacin. Without improvement, the antibiotic was changed to intravenous meropenem, and he gradually got afebrile. Blood culture on admission yielded a Gram-negative rod (GNR), which was identified as Helicobacter cinaedi by Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI TOF-MS). Additionally, after admission, pleural effusion on the left side increased. The pleural effusion was determined as exudative, but the Gram stain and culture were negative. He was diagnosed with H. cinaedi pleuritis and bacteremia. After three-weeks of intravenous meropenem, he was discharged. However, he complained of fever and chills again and was re-admitted. Intravenous meropenem was re-started, and he got afebrile. Ascites test via peritoneal dialysis tube was conducted. The ascitic fluid was turbid, and the white blood cell count was elevated predominantly with neutrophils. Blood culture on re-admission yielded a GNR, identified as H. cinaedi by MALDI TOF-MS. After three-week intravenous meropenem administration, ten-days of intravenous tazobactam/piperacillin plus vancomycin plus oral minocycline, followed by twelve-days of intravenous cefepime plus oral minocycline were administrated due to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

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