2111. Impact of Colonization by Multi Drug Resistant Bacteria on Graft Survival, Risk of Infection, and Mortality in Recipients of Solid Organ Transplant: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Colonization with multi-drug resistant bacteria (MDR) in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients increases the risk of post-transplant bacterial infection. MDR colonization impact on graft survival and mortality is not well established. Methods A search was executed by an expert librarian on PROSPERO, OVID Medline, Ovid EMBASE, Wiley Cochrane Library, ProQuest dissertations and Theses Global and SCOPUS, from inception until October 26, 2021. Adult SOT colonized with Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE), Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) or AmpC producing bacteria, carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), or MDR Pseudomonas were included and compared to non-colonized SOT. Pairs of reviewers screened abstracts and full studies for inclusion, and extracted data independently. We used RevMan to conduct a meta-analysis using random effects models to calculate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the incidence of infection, mortality, and graft failure. Statistical heterogeneity was determined using the I2 statistic. Figure-1 PRISMA chart, systemic review and metanalysis on Impact Of Colonization By Multi Drug Resistant Bacteria on Graft Survival, Risk of Infection, and Mortality in Recipients of Solid Organ Transplant. Results 59 articles spanning from 1989 to 2021 were included (Figure-1). Liver transplant (43 studies) and VRE colonization (17 studies) were the most common organ and MDR pathogen. MDR surveillance was performed by culture (71%) and PCR (6.7%). In liver transplant recipients, VRE and MRSA colonization were associated with increased infection risk, but not mortality (VRE infection: RR= 2.40 (95%CI 1.54-3.73; p< 0.001), I2= 66%; VRE mortality: RR= 1.64 (95%CI 0.88-3.05; p=0.12), I2= 44%; MRSA infection: RR= 4.07 (95%CI 2.66-6.24; p< 0.001), I2= 59%; MRSA mortality RR=1.47 (95%CI 0.79-2.76; p=0.23), I2= 35%). ESBL and CRE colonization were associated with increased risk of infection (ESBL: RR=9.87 (6.12-15.93); p< 0.001), I2=13%; CRE: RR= 13.64 (95%CI 5.73-32.47); p< 0.001), I2= 66%). CRE colonization was associated with increased mortality, RR=5.79 (95% CI 1.80-18.63; p=0.003), I2=0%. Conclusion While colonization with MRSA and VRE in liver transplant was not associated with increase mortality, CRE colonization was associated with almost 6-fold increased risk of death. These data should be taken into account when stratifying the risk of transplant. Disclosures Carlos Cervera, Associate Professor, Astra-Zeneca: Advisor/Consultant|AVIR Pharma: Grant/Research Support|AVIR Pharma: Honoraria|Lilly: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Honoraria|Sunovion: Advisor/Consultant|Takeda: Advisor/Consultant|Takeda: Honoraria|VerityPharma: Advisor/Consultant Dima Kabbani, MD, MSc, AVIR Pharma: Grant/Research Support|AVIR Pharma: Honoraria|GSK: Honoraria|Merck: Grant/Research Support.
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 | 0.014 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".