Chronic kidney disease and end‐stage renal disease are risk factors for poor outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Published in
International journal of clinical practice, July 2015
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the clinical outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in patients with chronic kidney diseases (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD).
A literature search was performed from inception through February 2015. Studies that reported relative risks, odds ratios or hazard ratios comparing the clinical outcomes of CDI in patients with CKD or ESRD and those without CKD or ESRD were included. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse variance method.
Nineteen studies (a case-control and 18 cohort studies) with 116,875 patients assessing clinical outcomes of CDI were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled RR of severe or complicated CDI in CKD patients was 1.51 (95% CI: 1.00-2.28). The risk of recurrent CDI is significant higher in patients with a pooled RR of 2.73 (95% CI: 1.36-5.47). The pooled RR of mortality risk of CDI in patients with CKD, ESRD and CKD or ESRD were 1.76 (95% CI: 1.26-2.47), 1.58 (1.37-1.83) and 1.76 (1.32-2.34) respectively.
This meta-analysis demonstrates poor outcomes of CDI including severe and recurrent CDI in CKD patients. History of CKD and ESRD are both associated with increased mortality risk in patients with CDI.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 June 2023.
All research outputs
#10,041,046
of 33,928,890 outputs
Outputs from International journal of clinical practice
#1,095
of 3,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,033
of 300,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International journal of clinical practice
#10
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,928,890 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 300,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
