Effects of extended anaerobic antibiotic coverage on anaerobic bloodstream infection: A multisite retrospective study.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Y Murai, K Nagaoka, N Iwanaga, H Kawasuji, M Miura, Y Sato, Y Hatakeyama, Y Kato, T Takazono, K Kosai, A Sugano, Y Morinaga, K Tanaka, K Yanagihara, H Mukae, Y Yamamoto
{"title":"Effects of extended anaerobic antibiotic coverage on anaerobic bloodstream infection: A multisite retrospective study.","authors":"Y Murai, K Nagaoka, N Iwanaga, H Kawasuji, M Miura, Y Sato, Y Hatakeyama, Y Kato, T Takazono, K Kosai, A Sugano, Y Morinaga, K Tanaka, K Yanagihara, H Mukae, Y Yamamoto","doi":"10.1016/j.ijid.2025.107840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Routine clinical practice with extended anaerobic antibiotic coverage (EAC) has been recently reconsidered for several infections; however, its benefits remain unclear even in patients with anaerobic bacteremia (AB). Here, we aimed to elucidate the effects of EAC on AB prognosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicenter retrospective observational study was conducted in patients with AB. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the effect of EAC on 30-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis was performed to confirm the robustness of the findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 483 patients were included, of whom 387 received EAC and 96 received limited anaerobic antibiotic coverage (LAC). Atypical foci of anaerobic infection, such as urinary tract infection and pneumonia, together with undetectable infection foci, comprised a larger proportion of infection foci in the LAC group than that in the EAC group (46.9% vs. 30.5%). The 30-day mortality rates of the EAC and LAC groups were similar (12.5% and 14.2%, respectively; p=0.664). Primary analysis revealed that EAC was not significantly associated with high mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-2.8), whereas source control significantly reduced this risk (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.2-0.5). The sensitivity analysis results were consistent with those of the primary analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated a less significant effect of initial EAC on AB compared with source control, particularly on AB with atypical infection foci. These findings would prompt reconsideration of the necessity of an initial EAC in several infections.</p>","PeriodicalId":14006,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"107840"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2025.107840","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Routine clinical practice with extended anaerobic antibiotic coverage (EAC) has been recently reconsidered for several infections; however, its benefits remain unclear even in patients with anaerobic bacteremia (AB). Here, we aimed to elucidate the effects of EAC on AB prognosis.

Methods: A multicenter retrospective observational study was conducted in patients with AB. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the effect of EAC on 30-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis was performed to confirm the robustness of the findings.

Results: In total, 483 patients were included, of whom 387 received EAC and 96 received limited anaerobic antibiotic coverage (LAC). Atypical foci of anaerobic infection, such as urinary tract infection and pneumonia, together with undetectable infection foci, comprised a larger proportion of infection foci in the LAC group than that in the EAC group (46.9% vs. 30.5%). The 30-day mortality rates of the EAC and LAC groups were similar (12.5% and 14.2%, respectively; p=0.664). Primary analysis revealed that EAC was not significantly associated with high mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-2.8), whereas source control significantly reduced this risk (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.2-0.5). The sensitivity analysis results were consistent with those of the primary analyses.

Conclusions: This study demonstrated a less significant effect of initial EAC on AB compared with source control, particularly on AB with atypical infection foci. These findings would prompt reconsideration of the necessity of an initial EAC in several infections.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
1020
审稿时长
30 days
期刊介绍: International Journal of Infectious Diseases (IJID) Publisher: International Society for Infectious Diseases Publication Frequency: Monthly Type: Peer-reviewed, Open Access Scope: Publishes original clinical and laboratory-based research. Reports clinical trials, reviews, and some case reports. Focuses on epidemiology, clinical diagnosis, treatment, and control of infectious diseases. Emphasizes diseases common in under-resourced countries.
×
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