MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403489484 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-75791-6

Decolonization strategies for ESBL-producing or carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales carriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4403489484 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongwei Wang, Fang Tian, Ming Zhao, Yongxia Ding, Xueyu Wang, Xinyu Cui

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanxi Provincial Education DepartmentShanXi Science and Technology DepartmentNatural Science Foundation of Shanxi Province
KeywordsCarriageCarbapenemMeta-analysisMedicineMicrobiologyBiologyInternal medicineAntibioticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevalence of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E) and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) has become a global public health problem. ESBL-E/CRE colonization can increase the risk of infection in patients and lead to poor disease prognosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate current decolonization strategies regarding ESBL-E/CRE and their efficacy. A literature search was conducted until August 2023 on the five databases to review decolonization strategies associated with ESBL-E/CRE. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 to compare differences in the decolonization strategy with placebo controls. The primary outcome was decolonization rates, with secondary outcomes of attributable death and adverse events. Quality of identified studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and cochrane risk assessment tool. Random and fixed effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled value. A total of 25 studies were included. In five randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, the decolonization effect of selective digestive decontamination(SDD) on ESBL-E/CRE at the end of treatment was significantly better in the experimental group than the controls [risk radio (RR): 3.30; 95% CI 1.78-6.14]. In three n-RCT studies, the decolonization effect in the experimental group was still better than the controls one month after SDD therapy [odds ratio (OR): 4.01; 95% CI 1.88-8.56]. The combined decolonization rates reported by six single-arm trial studies of SDD therapy ranged from 53.8 to 68.0%. Additionally, TSA analysis confirmed the effectiveness of SDD therapy. In studies on Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) therapy, the decolonization effect of the experimental group was significantly better than the controls 1 month after treatment (OR: 2.57; 95% CI 1.07-6.16). In studies without a control group and with varying follow-up times, the decolonization rates varied widely but indicated the effectiveness trend of FMT therapy (61.3-81.2%). Currently, research on the decolonization effect of probiotic therapy on ESBL-E/CRE is insufficient, and only a systematic review was conducted. SDD and FMT strategies have short-term benefits for ESBL-E/CRE decolonization, but long-term effects are unclear. The effect of probiotic therapy on ESBL-E/CRE decolonization is an interesting topic that still requires further investigation.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.038
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria→French-language works237,207→