Evidence Hub

Stenotrophomonas Maltophilia Meningitis in the Children Age Group: A Systematic Review of Case Reports

Abdullah I. Alsharif, Duaa Alsharif, Amal Aldhaheri, Mastorah Attallah AL-Juhani, Abeer Mohammed Alanazi, Mashael Mardih F. Alanazi

Open Journal of Pediatrics, 2025

Abstract

Background: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (SM) is an emerging opportunistic pathogen in healthcare-associated infections. While it is a well-known cause of pneumonia and bloodstream infections, its role in pediatric meningitis remains rare and underreported. Objective: To systematically review and summarize published pediatric cases of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia meningitis, highlighting risk factors, clinical presentations, CSF profiles, antimicrobial therapy, treatment duration, and outcomes. Methods: Case reports and series were identified using their PubMed ID from 2000 to 2024. Inclusion criteria were: patients aged Results: Eight articles were included, covering 10 pediatric cases. Most patients had identifiable risk factors such as prematurity, neurosurgical interventions (e.g., ventriculoperitoneal shunt), or prior broad-spectrum antibiotic use. Common CSF findings included neutrophilic pleocytosis, elevated protein, and hypoglycorrhachia. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin), and ceftazidime were the most used antimicrobials. Clinical outcomes were favorable in the majority of cases, with rare mortality and a few with neurological sequelae. Conclusion: Though rare, SM meningitis in pediatrics often occurs in the setting of significant comorbidities or interventions. Awareness, early microbiologic identification, and tailored antimicrobial therapy are key to favorable outcomes.

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