MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753724262 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.1897

Vancomycin-resistant Enterococci: Differing Rates and Patterns of Colonization in Liver vs. Non-Liver Solid Organ Transplant

2017· article· en· W2753724262 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra McFarlane, Dima Kabbani, Stephanie Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonizationInternal medicineLiver transplantationIncidence (geometry)PopulationGastroenterologyTransplantationMicrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) colonization in liver transplant recipients is associated with negative outcomes such as VRE infection, longer hospitalizations, and death. Less is known about VRE colonization in non-liver solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The purpose of this study was to describe the epidemiology of VRE colonization in non-liver SOT patients in one major Canadian organ transplant center and compare it to the liver transplant population. Single-center retrospective review of SOT between 2005 and 2015. Cross-referencing of our provincial infection control and SOT databases identified SOT patients who were colonized with VRE during their peri-transplant period. This period was defined as 3 months before to 1 year after transplant. All surveillance cultures, whether positive or negative, and all clinical cultures positive for VRE, were obtained. Patients were considered VRE colonized pre-transplant if they had a positive culture before, or within 48 hours of their transplant. During the study period, there were 663 liver and 1617 non-liver transplants, of which 130 (20%) and 149 (9%) were VRE colonized, respectively (P < 0.001). The rate of VRE colonization in the non-liver group differed by specific organ including: lung/heart–lung 84/437 (19%), heart 17/240 (7%), kidney 36/854 (4%), and miscellaneous 11/86 (13%). The pattern of colonization was different between organs, as depicted in the figure (P < 0.001). Forty-nine percent of liver patients were already colonized before transplant, compared with 17% in non-liver. In all organs, there was a high incidence of new VRE colonization in the immediate post-transplant period. The rate and pattern of VRE colonization differ by transplant organ. Overall rates approach those in the liver cohort for lung/heart–lung, despite no manipulation of the biliary tract, or breach of the peritoneum. Future study should determine risk factors for VRE colonization in non-liver SOT and assess if colonization is associated with worse outcomes in non-liver patients. All authors: No reported disclosures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207