↓ Skip to main content

Carbapenems versus alternative antibiotics for the treatment of bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacter, Citrobacter or Serratia species: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC), November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
74 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Carbapenems versus alternative antibiotics for the treatment of bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacter, Citrobacter or Serratia species: a systematic review with meta-analysis
Published in
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC), November 2015
DOI 10.1093/jac/dkv346
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick N. A. Harris, Jane Y. Wei, Andrew W. Shen, Ahmed A. Abdile, Stuart Paynter, Rachel R. Huxley, Nirmala Pandeya, Yohei Doi, Kyungmin Huh, Catherine S. O'Neal, Thomas R. Talbot, David L. Paterson

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared effects of different antibiotics on mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacteriaceae with chromosomal AmpC β-lactamase. Databases were systematically searched for studies reporting mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by AmpC producers treated with carbapenems, broad-spectrum β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors (BLBLIs), quinolones or cefepime. Pooled ORs for mortality were calculated for cases that received monotherapy with these agents versus carbapenems. Registration: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42014014992; 18 November 2014). Eleven observational studies were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting empirical and definitive monotherapy. In unadjusted analyses, no significant difference in mortality was found between BLBLIs versus carbapenems used for definitive therapy (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.32-2.36) or empirical therapy (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.14-1.60) or cefepime versus carbapenems as definitive therapy (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.27-1.38) or empirical therapy (0.60; 95% CI 0.17-2.20). Use of a fluoroquinolone as definitive therapy was associated with a lower risk of mortality compared with carbapenems (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.19-0.78). Three studies with patient-level data were used to adjust for potential confounders. The non-significant trends favouring non-carbapenem options in these studies were diminished after adjustment for age, sex and illness severity scores, suggestive of residual confounding. Despite limitations of available data, there was no strong evidence to suggest that BLBLIs, quinolones or cefepime were inferior to carbapenems. The reduced risk of mortality observed with quinolone use may reflect less serious illness in patients, rather than superiority over carbapenems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 114 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 21 18%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 22 19%
Unknown 31 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 34 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 26 December 2022.
All research outputs
#810,533
of 25,653,515 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC)
#147
of 8,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,280
of 297,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC)
#2
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,653,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 297,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.