Meta-meta-analysis of the mortality risk associated with MRSA compared to MSSA bacteraemia.

Le infezioni in medicina Pub Date : 2024-06-01 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.53854/liim-3202-2
Shuaibu Suleiman Adeiza, Islam Aminul
{"title":"Meta-meta-analysis of the mortality risk associated with MRSA compared to MSSA bacteraemia.","authors":"Shuaibu Suleiman Adeiza, Islam Aminul","doi":"10.53854/liim-3202-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> bacteraemia (SAB) is a bloodstream infection that carries a high risk of exacerbating a diseased state and may result in an increased death rate. The aim of this study was to assess mortality risk in Methicillin Resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MRSA) bacteraemia compared to Methicillin Susceptible <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MSSA) bacteraemia through meta-meta-analyses. The study followed PRISMA guidelines, conducting a comprehensive search in Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. It included full-text systematic reviews and meta-analyses comparing MRSA vs. MSSA bacteraemia, excluding reviews without data pooling and unclear selection criteria. Validity was assessed using QUOROM and AMSTAR. Edwards' Venn diagrams were used to visualized overlaps between primary studies. Aggregated odds ratio (OR) and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effect model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Higgins I2 statistic. The study included 3 meta-analysis studies, a total of 38,159 patients, with 9,056 having MRSA bacteraemia and 29,103 having MSSA bacteraemia. Data were collected from 46 different outcome studies published between 2001 and 2022. The meta-analyses used 7 to 33 primary studies from 1990 to 2020, with no overlap. Odds ratios (ORs) ranged from 1.78 to 2.92, while relative risks (RR) ranged from 1.57 to 2.37 for the included meta-anlysis. The pooled analysis confirmed a higher risk of mortality in patients with MRSA bacteraemia (OR: 2.35, RR: 2.01, HR: 1.61) compared to MSSA bacteraemia. Heterogeneity among the studies was considerable (I2: 90-91%). The study strongly supports that most patient deaths from SAB are linked to MRSA rather than MSSA. This highlights the significant public health problem posed by SAB, with difficult and often unsuccessful treatment leading to increased mortality and high healthcare costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":502111,"journal":{"name":"Le infezioni in medicina","volume":"32 2","pages":"131-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11142415/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Le infezioni in medicina","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53854/liim-3202-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) is a bloodstream infection that carries a high risk of exacerbating a diseased state and may result in an increased death rate. The aim of this study was to assess mortality risk in Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia compared to Methicillin Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia through meta-meta-analyses. The study followed PRISMA guidelines, conducting a comprehensive search in Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. It included full-text systematic reviews and meta-analyses comparing MRSA vs. MSSA bacteraemia, excluding reviews without data pooling and unclear selection criteria. Validity was assessed using QUOROM and AMSTAR. Edwards' Venn diagrams were used to visualized overlaps between primary studies. Aggregated odds ratio (OR) and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effect model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Higgins I2 statistic. The study included 3 meta-analysis studies, a total of 38,159 patients, with 9,056 having MRSA bacteraemia and 29,103 having MSSA bacteraemia. Data were collected from 46 different outcome studies published between 2001 and 2022. The meta-analyses used 7 to 33 primary studies from 1990 to 2020, with no overlap. Odds ratios (ORs) ranged from 1.78 to 2.92, while relative risks (RR) ranged from 1.57 to 2.37 for the included meta-anlysis. The pooled analysis confirmed a higher risk of mortality in patients with MRSA bacteraemia (OR: 2.35, RR: 2.01, HR: 1.61) compared to MSSA bacteraemia. Heterogeneity among the studies was considerable (I2: 90-91%). The study strongly supports that most patient deaths from SAB are linked to MRSA rather than MSSA. This highlights the significant public health problem posed by SAB, with difficult and often unsuccessful treatment leading to increased mortality and high healthcare costs.

MRSA与MSSA菌血症相关死亡风险的元-元分析。
金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症(SAB)是一种血流感染,极有可能加重病情并导致死亡率上升。本研究旨在通过荟萃分析评估耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)菌血症与甲氧西林易感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)菌血症的死亡风险。本研究遵循 PRISMA 指南,在 Scopus、PubMed 和 Google Scholar 上进行了全面搜索。研究纳入了比较 MRSA 与 MSSA 菌血症的全文系统综述和荟萃分析,排除了没有数据汇集和选择标准不明确的综述。使用 QUOROM 和 AMSTAR 对有效性进行了评估。爱德华兹维恩图用于直观显示主要研究之间的重叠。使用随机效应模型计算了综合几率比(OR)和带有 95% 置信区间的风险比。异质性采用希金斯 I2 统计量进行评估。该研究包括 3 项荟萃分析研究,共计 38,159 名患者,其中 9,056 人患有 MRSA 菌血症,29,103 人患有 MSSA 菌血症。数据收集自 2001 年至 2022 年间发表的 46 项不同的结果研究。荟萃分析使用了1990年至2020年期间的7至33项主要研究,没有重叠。所纳入的荟萃分析的比值比(ORs)从1.78到2.92不等,而相对风险(RR)从1.57到2.37不等。汇总分析证实,与MSSA菌血症相比,MRSA菌血症患者的死亡风险更高(OR:2.35,RR:2.01,HR:1.61)。各研究之间的异质性相当大(I2:90-91%)。该研究有力地证明,大多数死于 SAB 的患者与 MRSA 而非 MSSA 有关。这凸显了 SAB 带来的重大公共卫生问题,其治疗难度大且往往不成功,导致死亡率上升,医疗成本高昂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信