Angelique E Boutzoukas, Weixiao Dai, Eric Cober, Lilian M Abbo, Lauren Komarow, Liang Chen, Carol Hill, Michael J Satlin, Matthew Grant, Bettina C Fries, Gopi Patel, Todd P McCarty, Cesar A Arias, Robert A Bonomo, David van Duin
{"title":"Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales in solid organ transplant recipients.","authors":"Angelique E Boutzoukas, Weixiao Dai, Eric Cober, Lilian M Abbo, Lauren Komarow, Liang Chen, Carol Hill, Michael J Satlin, Matthew Grant, Bettina C Fries, Gopi Patel, Todd P McCarty, Cesar A Arias, Robert A Bonomo, David van Duin","doi":"10.1016/j.ajt.2024.10.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are an important threat to the health of solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr); data comparing outcomes of SOTr with CRE to non-SOTr with CRE are lacking. A matched cohort study was performed within two prospective, multicenter, cohort studies (CRACKLE, CRACKLE-2). The epidemiology, desirability of outcome rankings (DOOR) outcomes, and mortality of SOTr and non-SOTr hospitalized in the United States (December 2011 - August 2017) with clinical isolates with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined CRE were compared. In total, 121 SOTr and 242 matched non-SOTr were included. Fifty one percent of isolates met infection criteria. SOTr were younger (p<0.001), less acutely ill (p=0.029), less often had a malignancy history (p=0.006), and more often were admitted from home (p<0.001) than non-SOTr. SOTr had more favorable adjusted DOOR outcomes; a randomly selected SOTr had a 58% (95% CI 53%-64%) probability of a better outcome as compared to a randomly selected non-SOTr. All-cause 30-day mortality was 14% (17/121) in SOTr vs. 25% (60/242) in non-SOTr, p=0.018. After stabilized inverse-probability weighted adjustment, SOTr had a 7% lower 30-d mortality risk than non-SOTr (95% CI -15%, 1%). SOTr with CRE do not have worse outcomes than matched patients without transplant history.</p>","PeriodicalId":123,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Transplantation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajt.2024.10.020","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are an important threat to the health of solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr); data comparing outcomes of SOTr with CRE to non-SOTr with CRE are lacking. A matched cohort study was performed within two prospective, multicenter, cohort studies (CRACKLE, CRACKLE-2). The epidemiology, desirability of outcome rankings (DOOR) outcomes, and mortality of SOTr and non-SOTr hospitalized in the United States (December 2011 - August 2017) with clinical isolates with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined CRE were compared. In total, 121 SOTr and 242 matched non-SOTr were included. Fifty one percent of isolates met infection criteria. SOTr were younger (p<0.001), less acutely ill (p=0.029), less often had a malignancy history (p=0.006), and more often were admitted from home (p<0.001) than non-SOTr. SOTr had more favorable adjusted DOOR outcomes; a randomly selected SOTr had a 58% (95% CI 53%-64%) probability of a better outcome as compared to a randomly selected non-SOTr. All-cause 30-day mortality was 14% (17/121) in SOTr vs. 25% (60/242) in non-SOTr, p=0.018. After stabilized inverse-probability weighted adjustment, SOTr had a 7% lower 30-d mortality risk than non-SOTr (95% CI -15%, 1%). SOTr with CRE do not have worse outcomes than matched patients without transplant history.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Transplantation is a leading journal in the field of transplantation. It serves as a forum for debate and reassessment, an agent of change, and a major platform for promoting understanding, improving results, and advancing science. Published monthly, it provides an essential resource for researchers and clinicians worldwide.
The journal publishes original articles, case reports, invited reviews, letters to the editor, critical reviews, news features, consensus documents, and guidelines over 12 issues a year. It covers all major subject areas in transplantation, including thoracic (heart, lung), abdominal (kidney, liver, pancreas, islets), tissue and stem cell transplantation, organ and tissue donation and preservation, tissue injury, repair, inflammation, and aging, histocompatibility, drugs and pharmacology, graft survival, and prevention of graft dysfunction and failure. It also explores ethical and social issues in the field.