Epidemiology and risk factors for nosocomial bloodstream infections in solid organ transplants over a 10‐year period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplantation (SOT). We sought to determine the types of nosocomial BSIs and risk factors for them in SOT. METHODS: Prospectively collected databases of all SOT and nosocomial BSIs occurring at our institution for a 10-year period were reviewed. RESULTS: From 2003-2012, we observed 157 nosocomial BSI episodes in 2257 SOTs, the majority of which were caused by staphylococci and enterococci (67.5%). The most common sources of BSI were central line, organ space, respiratory, and gastrointestinal. Kidney transplant patients had the lowest risk of acquiring a BSI compared with other SOT types. Lung transplant patients were at increased risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus BSI and heart transplant patients were at increased risk of a Candida albicans BSI, when compared to other organ transplant types. When coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS) or C. albicans was isolated, the central line was most often the source. The implementation of central-line bundles during the study period correlated temporally with a decreased rate of CoNS BSI. Over the 10-year period, vancomycin-resistant enterococci became the most common enterococcal BSI. Donor-positive cytomegalovirus status was associated with an increased risk of BSI, when compared to donor-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the common sources, risk factors, and causative organisms of BSI, which can guide empiric antibiotic choices, and highlights areas where preventative interventions could be targeted to prevent nosocomial BSI in SOT.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".