Evidence Hub

Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp. bloodstream infections in hematologic patients: clinical characteristics, genomic features, and eravacycline-based combination therapy

Guo W, Li J, Yang N, Zhen S, Zhang T, Lin Q, Cao Y, Cao W et al.

BMC infectious diseases, 2026

62 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter spp. bloodstream infection (BSI) is concerning in hematologic patients, but integrated clinical and genomic analyses are scarce.

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 62 hematologic patients with Acinetobacter spp. BSI over 13 years, including 30 MDR and 32 non-MDR cases. Whole-genome sequence (WGS) was conducted on 23 MDR isolates. Checkerboard assays evaluated the in vitro activity of eravacycline combined with sulbactam, meropenem, cefoperazone-sulbactam, polymyxin B, and levofloxacin.

RESULTS: Female (66.67% vs. 34.38%, P = 0.022) and adult (≥ 14 years; 80.00% vs. 53.12%, P = 0.049) patients were more common in the MDR group. Prior carbapenem exposure, prolonged neutropenia, and respiratory tract colonization were associated with MDR-BSI. The majority of MDR cases did not receive appropriate empirical therapy within 24 h (40.00% vs. 90.62%, P < 0.001). The overall 30-day mortality was 38.71%, significantly higher in MDR than non-MDR patients (53.33% vs. 25.00%, P = 0.043). Among MDR subgroup, 30-day non-survivors had more profound cytopenias and higher inflammatory markers at BSI onset (P < 0.05). WGS revealed diverse sequence types and capsular loci across the isolates, including 14 non-A.baumannii and 9 A.baumannii strains. Among 20 carbapenemase-positive isolates, blaOXA-23 (n = 9) predominated in A.baumannii, while blaOXA-58 (n = 7) and blaNDM-1 (n = 7) were restricted to non-A.baumannii isolates. Eravacycline…

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: 62 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