| Title |
Incidental intraoperative diagnosis of Mycobacterium abscessus meningeal infection: a case report and review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infection, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s15010-018-1141-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesca Giovannenze, Vito Stifano, Giancarlo Scoppettuolo, Fernando Damiano, Federico Pallavicini, Giovanni Delogu, Ivana Palucci, Alessandro Rapisarda, Cosimo Sturdà, Angelo Pompucci |
| Abstract |
Mycobacterium abscessus, and rapidly growing mycobacteria in general, are rare but increasing causes of central nervous system (CNS) infections. The aim of this study is to highlight the importance of considering these microorganism in the differential diagnosis of CNS infections, obtaining a prompt diagnosis, and improving clinical outcomes. Case report and literature review. We report a case of meningeal infection in a patient who underwent decompressive craniectomy after a craniofacial trauma. The diagnosis was made analyzing a sample obtained during a second operation of cranioplasty. A regimen of amikacin, clarithromycin, and imipenem/cilastatin was started. In the following days, the patient experienced a variety of side effects. So, first clarithromycin was replaced with linezolid, then amikacin was stopped and cefoxitin added to the therapy and at the end all the antibiotics were withdrawn. The patient was discharged in good conditions and a clinical interdisciplinary follow-up was started. After 12 months, the patient is still doing well. After a literature analysis, 15 cases of M. abscessus CNS infections were identified. Various modes of acquisition, underlying disease and therapeutic schemes were evident. Considering the results of the literature analysis and the increasing incidence of M. abscessus, all specialists involved in the management of CNS infection should be aware of the importance of atypical microorganisms in differential diagnosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,483,282
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Infection
#1,252
of 1,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,605
of 326,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.