Next Article in Journal
Nanostructured Antibiotics and Their Emerging Medicinal Applications: An Overview of Nanoantibiotics
Next Article in Special Issue
Genomic Analysis of Ceftazidime/Avibactam-Resistant GES-Producing Sequence Type 235 Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates
Previous Article in Journal
Are Virulence and Antibiotic Resistance Genes Linked? A Comprehensive Analysis of Bacterial Chromosomes and Plasmids
 
 
antibiotics-logo
Article Menu

Article Menu

Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Pseudomonas aeruginosa Community-Onset Bloodstream Infections: Characterization, Diagnostic Predictors, and Predictive Score Development—Results from the PRO-BAC Cohort

by
Pedro María Martínez Pérez-Crespo
1,2,
Álvaro Rojas
3,
Joaquín Felipe Lanz-García
1,
Pilar Retamar-Gentil
1,
José María Reguera-Iglesias
4,
Olalla Lima-Rodríguez
5,
Alfonso del Arco Jiménez
6,
Jonathan Fernández Suárez
7,
Alfredo Jover-Saenz
8,
Josune Goikoetxea Aguirre
9,
Eva León Jiménez
2,
María Luisa Cantón-Bulnes
10,
Pilar Ortega Lafont
11,
Carlos Armiñanzas Castillo
12,
Juan Sevilla Blanco
13,
Jordi Cuquet Pedragosa
14,
Lucía Boix-Palop
15,
Berta Becerril Carral
16,
Alberto Bahamonde-Carrasco
17,
Teresa Marrodan Ciordia
18,
Clara Natera Kindelán
19,
Isabel María Reche Molina
20,
Carmen Herrero Rodríguez
21,
Inés Pérez Camacho
22,
David Vinuesa García
23,
Fátima Galán-Sánchez
24,
Alejandro Smithson Amat
25,
Esperanza Merino de Lucas
26,
Antonio Sánchez-Porto
27,
Marcos Guzmán García
28,
Inmaculada López-Hernández
1,
Jesús Rodríguez-Baño
1,*,
Luis Eduardo López-Cortés
1 and
on behalf of the PROBAC REIPI/GEIH-SEIMC/SAEI Group
add Show full author list remove Hide full author list
1
Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Unit, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena and Department of Medicine, University of Sevilla/Biomedicines Institute of Sevilla, 41009 Sevilla, Spain
2
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de Valme, 41014 Sevilla, Spain
3
Departamento de Enfermedades Infecciosas del Adulto, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago 8331150, Chile
4
Servicio de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, IBIMA Málaga, 29010 Málaga, Spain
5
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Servicio de Medicina Interna, Hospital Álvaro Cunqueiro, 36312 Vigo, Spain
6
Grupo Enfermedades Infecciosas, Servicio de Medicina Interna, Hospital Costa del Sol, 29603 Marbella, Spain
7
Unidad de Microbiología, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Principado de Asturias (ISPA), Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, 33011 Oviedo, Spain
8
Unidad Funcional de Infecciones Nosocomiales, Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, 25198 Lérida, Spain
9
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario de Cruces, 48903 Bizkaia, Spain
10
Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, 41009 Sevilla, Spain
11
Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, 09006 Burgos, Spain
12
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Universidad de Cantabria, IDIVAL, 39008 Santander, Spain
13
Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología, Hospital Universitario Jerez de la Frontera, 11407 Jerez de la Frontera, Spain
14
Departamento de Medicina Interna, Hospital Universitario de Granollers, 08402 Granollers, Spain
15
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitari Mútua de Terrassa, 08221 Barcelona, Spain
16
Unidad Clínica de Gestión de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología, Área Sanitaria del Campo de Gibraltar, 11207 Cádiz, Spain
17
Departamento de Medicina Interna, Hospital de El Bierzo, 24404 Ponferrada, Spain
18
Departamento de Microbiología Clínica, Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León (CAULE), 24071 León, Spain
19
Unidad Clínica de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, 14004 Córdoba, Spain
20
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario Torrecárdenas, 04009 Almería, Spain
21
Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica, Complejo Hospitalario de Jaén, 23007 Jaén, Spain
22
Unidad de Medicina Tropical, Hospital General de Poniente, 04700 El Ejido, Spain
23
Unidad Gestión Clínica Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario Clínico San Cecilio, 18016 Granada, Spain
24
Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Microbiología, Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar, 11009 Cádiz, Spain
25
Unidad de Medicina Interna, Fundació Hospital de l’Esperit Sant, 08923 Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Spain
26
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital Universitario General de Alicante, 03010 Alicante, Spain
27
Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología, Hospital de la Línea de la Concepción, 11300 La Línea de la Concepción, Spain
28
Servicio de Medicina Interna, Hospital San Juan de la Cruz, 23400 Úbeda, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Membership of the PROBAC REIPI/GEIH-SEIMC/SAEI Group is provided in the Acknowledgements.
Antibiotics 2022, 11(6), 707; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060707
Submission received: 21 April 2022 / Revised: 15 May 2022 / Accepted: 19 May 2022 / Published: 24 May 2022

Abstract

:
Community-onset bloodstream infections (CO-BSI) caused by gram-negative bacilli are common and associated with significant mortality; those caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa are associated with worse prognosis and higher rates of inadequateempirical antibiotic treatment. The aims of this study were to describe the characteristics of patients with CO-BSI caused by P. aeruginosa, to identify predictors, and to develop a predictive score for P. aeruginosa CO-BSI. Materials/methods: PROBAC is a prospective cohort including patients >14 years with BSI from 26 Spanish hospitals between October 2016 and May 2017. Patients with monomicrobial P. aeruginosa CO-BSI and monomicrobial Enterobacterales CO-BSI were included. Variables of interest were collected. Independent predictors of Pseudomonas aeruginosa CO-BSI were identified by logistic regression and a prediction score was developed. Results: A total of 78patients with P. aeruginosa CO-BSI and 2572 with Enterobacterales CO-BSI were included. Patients with P. aeruginosa had a median age of 70 years (IQR 60–79), 68.8% were male, median Charlson score was 5 (IQR 3–7), and 30-daymortality was 18.5%. Multivariate analysis identified the following predictors of CO-BSI-PA [adjusted OR (95% CI)]: male gender [1.89 (1.14–3.12)], haematological malignancy [2.45 (1.20–4.99)], obstructive uropathy [2.86 (1.13–3.02)], source of infection other than urinary tract, biliary tract or intra-abdominal [6.69 (4.10–10.92)] and healthcare-associated BSI [1.85 (1.13–3.02)]. Anindex predictive of CO-BSI-PA was developed; scores ≥ 3.5 showed a negative predictive value of 89% and an area under the receiver operator curve (ROC) of 0.66. Conclusions: We did not find a good predictive score of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI due to its relatively low incidence in the overall population. Our model includes variables that are easy to collect in real clinical practice and could be useful to detect patients with very low risk of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI.

1. Introduction

Bloodstream infections (BSI) are a common consequence of invasive infections and cause significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Their prognosis depends on several factors, including the aetiological agent, source of infection, appropriate antimicrobial treatment and the underlying conditions of the patient [1,2]. With respect to aetiological agents, invasive Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections are associated with high mortality rates, and prognosis is strongly associated with early active treatment, among other factors [3,4,5].
Since P. aeruginosa is predominantly a nosocomial pathogen, antipseudomonal antibiotics, especially antipseudomonal beta-lactams, in empirical regimens are often reserved for hospital-acquired infections to avoid overuse. Indeed, invasive infections due to P. aeruginosa outside the hospital setting are regarded as unusual [6,7]; in 2016, this microorganism caused 1.4% of community-acquired BSIs and 3.6% of healthcare-related BSIs in Spain [8]. However, inappropriate empirical antimicrobial treatment is associated with worse prognosis and mortality in P. aeruginosa BSI, including those that are community-onset [5]. Consequently, despite the low frequency, it would be useful to identify patients at risk of community-onset BSI due to P. aeruginosa in order to optimize their management.
The objectives of this study were to identify predictors of P. aeruginosa community-onset bloodstream infections (CO-BSI) and to develop a predictive score. In addition, we provide updated information on the epidemiological characteristics of community-onset P. aeruginosa bloodstream infections in Spain.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Design, Study Sites and Periods

The PRO-BAC study was a multicentre prospective cohort study conducted in 26 Spanish hospitals (18 tertiary and 8 community hospitals) between 1 October 2016 and 31 March 2017, including all episodes of clinically significant BSI in adult patients (>14 years); no exclusion criteria were applied [8]. All methodological details were previously published [8]. Blood cultures were obtained, processed and interpreted in accordance with standard recommendations [9,10]. The study was approved by the Ethics Committees of the participating centres, which waived the need for informed consent due to the observational design, and it was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03148769). The STROBE recommendations were followed in this study (Supplementary Table S1) [11].
For this analysis, episodes of monomicrobial CO-BSIin the PRO-BAC cohort caused by P. aeruginosa or any Enterobacterales were eligible. Predictors of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI were studied by comparing exposure to different variables with those of CO-BSI caused by Enterobacterales, the reason for this being that P. aeruginosa is often considered in patients when Enterobacterales are already a reasonable aetiological option.

2.2. Variables and Definitions

Variables collected include the type of hospital; admission ward; demographics; type and severity of chronic underlying diseases according to Charlson index [12]; acute severity of underlying disease according to Pitt score [13]; type of acquisition [14]; exposure to invasive procedures and devices in the previous month (including vascular catheter, urinary catheter, parenteral nutrition, mechanical ventilation and major surgery); antimicrobial use in the preceding month; aetiology of BSI; source of infection; presentation with severe sepsis or shock according to standard [15] and Sepsis-3 criteria [16]; antimicrobial treatment; and 30-day mortality. Data were collected according to an electronic case report form specifically designed by local investigators and supervised by Infectious Diseases and Critical Care physicians
BSIs were considered clinically significant if accompanied by signs or symptoms of infection, and contamination was ruled out [9,17]. In the case of potential contaminants, such as coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) or diphtheroids, only episodes in which the organism was isolated from ≥2 blood draws were considered [9].
Acquisition was considered community-onset if signs or symptoms of infection started <48 h after hospital admission or 48 h after hospital discharge, including strictly community-acquired cases and healthcare-related cases. Healthcare-related BSI was defined according to previously described criteria [14,18]. Source of BSI was based on clinical and laboratory data, using standard CDC criteria for secondary BSI [18]. For the diagnosis of catheter-related BSI, differential time to positivity was employed at all sites typically used for surgically implanted indwelling or difficult-to-replacecatheters. Subsequent episodes in the same patient caused by the same pathogen were excluded unless they occurred more than >3 months apart.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Data are expressed as proportions for categorical variables, and as either means with standard deviation, or median with interquartile range (IQR) for continuous variables, as appropriate. Chi-square and Student’s t-tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. All time-dependent variables were measured with reference to the day when blood cultures were drawn (considered as day 0). All p values were two-tailed, and p values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Independent predictors of CO-BSI due to P. aeruginosa bacteraemia were identified by logistic regression; variables with p value < 0.1 in univariate analysis and those considered potential predictors based on previous data were entered into the models, using a manual backward-stepwise selection procedure. Interactions between variables were checked. A predictive score was created using the final multivariate model; each predictive factor was assigned points, calculated by dividing the beta coefficients by the smallest beta coefficient in the model and rounding to the nearest unit. Positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity and specificity of the score were calculated. The predictive ability of the risk score for the observed data was checked by calculating the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). Data were analysed using SPSS version 23.0 (Chicago, IL, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Study Population

The PROBAC cohort included 5723 cases of monomicrobial bacteraemia, of which 3720 (65%) were classified as community-onset; 2680 (72%) of these were caused by gram-negative pathogens. P. aeruginosa caused 78 CO-BSI (1% of all CO-BSI and 3% of CO-BSI caused by gram-negatives); Enterobacterales caused 2572 CO-BSI (44.9% of all CO-BSI episodes, and 96% of those caused by gram-negatives).
Specific microorganisms isolated in the group of 2572 Enterobacterales CO-BSIs were E. coli (2064, 80.2%), Klebsiella spp. (265, 10.3%), Proteus spp. (74, 2.9%), Enterobacter spp. (49, 1.9%), Salmonella spp. (27, 1%), Citrobacter spp. (20, 0.8%), Serratia marcescens (16, 0.6%), Morganella morganii (12, 0.5%), and others (45, 1.8%).

3.2. Demographics, Comorbidities and Clinical Characteristics

Patient characteristics, sources of infection, clinical presentation, and CO-BSI mortality due to P. aeruginosa and Enterobacterales are shown in Table 1. Overall, patients with P. aeruginosa CO-BSI were younger, more frequently male, and had cancer, immunosuppressive conditions, healthcare-related BSI, and exposure to invasive procedures; the sources of BSI were also different (respiratory tract, unknown source and vascular catheter were more frequent among P. aeruginosa infections, while the urinary and biliary tract, and intraabdominal infections were less frequent). No statistically significant differences in severity were found at clinical presentation or ICU admission, although30-day mortality was higher among episodes caused by P. aeruginosa than than by Enterobacterales.
Specific antibiotic exposures in the 30 days prior to BSI are shown in Supplementary Table S2. Patients with P. aeruginosa had been more frequently exposed to antibiotics, and specifically to antipseudomonal beta-lactams.

3.3. Risk Factors and Predictive Score Development

A multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model showed that the independent risk factors for a P. aeruginosa aetiology in CO-BSI were male gender [1.89 (1.14–3.12), p = 0.01], haematological malignancy [2.45 (1.20–4.99), p = 0.01], obstructive uropathy [2.86 (1.13–3.02), p = 0.04], source of infection other than the urinary tract, biliary tract or intra-abdominal [6.69 (4.10–10.92), p < 0.01] and healthcare-associated BSI [1.85 (1.13–3.02), p = 0.01]. None of the antibiotic exposures shown in Supplementary Table S2 were statistically significant risk factors after adjustment for other variables.
A predictive score was developed using the risk factors for P. aeruginosa CO-BSI identified in the multivariate analysis. The scores assigned to each significant variable according to their regression coefficient are listed in Table 2.The score had an area under the ROC curve of 0.66 (0.57–0.74), indicating a moderate predictive ability. The NPV, PPV, sensitivity and specificity for the different values of the score are shown in Table 3.
We also explored a model excluding patients with oncohaematological malignancies and neutropenia, as these patients would probably be candidates for antipseudomonal drugs anyway. The AUROC curve for the resulting model was 0.67 (0.55–0.74), showing a similar predictive ability.

3.4. Stratified Analysis by Source of Infection

To explorethe risk factors associated with P. aeruginosa CO-BSI versus Enterobacterales CO-BSI indifferent types of infection, a stratified analysis by source of bacteraemia was performed.
Among patients with urinary tract BSI, male sex [RR 1.55 (1.17–2.07), p = 0.03], cerebrovascular disease [RR 2.41 (1.26–4.61), p = 0.01], obstructive uropathy [RR 3.19 (1.84–5.51), p < 0.01], urinary catheter [RR 3.04 (1.76–2.25), p < 0.01], percutaneous nephrostomy [RR 3.65 (1.22–10.98), p = 0.02], ureteral stent [RR 3.81 (1.27–11.47), p = 0.01], transurethral resection [RR 8.35 (2–34.9), p < 0.01], healthcare-related acquisition [RR 1.68 (1.2–2.36), p = 0.02], cephalosporin use in the previous 30 days [RR 3.14 (1.40–7.08), p = 0.01] and carbapenem use in the previous 30 days [RR 5.32 (1.32–21.44), p = 0.01] were associated with an increased risk of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI.
Among those with unknown source of BSI, male sex [RR 1.55 (1.22–1.98), p = 0.04] and healthcare-related acquisition [RR 1.8 (1.3–2.48), p = 0.02] were associated with an increased risk of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI. Among biliary tract BSI patients, antibiotic use in the previous 30 days [RR 3.83 (2.31–6.33), p < 0.01] and biliary prosthesis [RR 4.12 (2.09–8.12), p < 0.01] were associated with an increased risk of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI. Obstructive biliary disease did not show an increased risk of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI compared to Enterobacterales CO-BSI [RR 1.32 (0.53–3.25), p = 0.26]. Intra-abdominal source of infection, oncological disease [RR 3.29 (2.64–4.1), p = 0.03], immunosuppressive treatment [RR 6.7 (4.7–9.49), p = 0.02], neutropenia <500 cells/µL [RR 25.86 (12.51–53.46), p < 0.01], antibiotic use in the previous 30 days [RR 5.32 (3.93–7.21), p = 0.03], use of indwelling vascular catheter in the previous week [RR 5.17 (3.84–6.96), p = 0.04], use of quinolones in the previous 30 days [RR 12.93 (2.7–61.8) p < 0.01] and anti-pseudomonal beta-lactams in the previous 30 days [RR 12.93 (2.7–61.8) p < 0.01] were all associated with P. aeruginosa CO-BSI.

4. Discussion

P. aeruginosa is an aetiology of concern in invasive infections as it is often associated with frail or immunocompromised patients and is associated with high mortality rates. Importantly, therapeutic options are more limited than for other common bacteria, and resistance is increasing worldwide [6,19,20,21,22]; in fact, the World Health Organization has listed carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa as a critical priority pathogen [23].
P. aeruginosa is considered an infrequent pathogen in non-nosocomial infections, despite the increasingly blurred boundaries between the hospital environment and the community. Furthermore, previous reports have shown that the epidemiological differences between community-acquired and healthcare-related BSI in all-cause bacteraemia were not well-define din the case of P. aeruginosa alone [24]. Treatment of P. aeruginosa is limited to a small number of antibiotics. Due to the well-known ability of P. aeruginosa to develop resistance, even during antibiotic treatment [20,21,25], empirical antipseudomonal antibiotics are mostly reserved for nosocomial infections. At the same time, delay in the administration of appropriate treatment is associated with increased mortality in P. aeruginosa BSI [3,4,5,26], which is crucial, especially when resistant or multi-drug-resistant P. aeruginosa is involved or suspected, due to the limited number of potentially useful antibiotics for these infections. However, the association between phenotypic resistance, virulence factors and biofilm-forming ability remains controversial [27].Thus, although the prevalence of P. aeruginosa as a cause of CO-BSI is low [7,8], it is necessary to identify in advance which patients would benefit from the use of antipseudomonal agents.
In this prospective multicentre bacteraemia cohort, we identified a substantial number of cases of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI and compared them with cases presenting with Enterobacterales CO-BSI. In our study, as reported previously [5], male sex, oncological disease, chronic pulmonary disease, haematological malignancy, immunosuppressive treatment and healthcare-related acquisition were more frequent in the P. aeruginosa CO-BSI group. In contrast toother studies [26,28], we observed that there were no significant differences in age or Charlson comorbidity index between P. aeruginosa CO-BSI and Enterobacterales CO-BSI after adjusting forsex, comorbidities and invasive procedures. Obstructive uropathy was also found to be an independent risk factor for P. aeruginosa CO-BSI. In the same vein, Esparcia et al. [29] developed a study only on community-onset urinary sepsis in the elderly, in which male sex, urinary tract neoplasia, recurrent urinary tract infection, indwelling urinary catheter and healthcare-related acquisition were found to be independent risk factors for community-onset P. aeruginosa.
To our knowledge, two studies reporting predictive scores for P. aeruginosa BSI have been published: the first one for all P. aeruginosa BSI cases, and the second for community-onset cases alone. Gransden et al. [30] presented a predictive score for all P. aeruginosa BSI. Eight variables were included; positive predictors were male gender, neutrophil count ≤1 × 109 cells/L, previous/current antibiotic treatment, corticosteroid or cytotoxic treatment, hospital acquisition, intensive care unit patient, high-risk source of bacteraemia, and low-risk source of bacteraemia as a negative predictor. With a score > 3, the probability of BSI due to P. aeruginosa was 19.3%. Schechner et al. [7] described a prediction score for community-onset cases of P. aeruginosa BSI, which included the following variables: age > 90 years, recent antimicrobial use, presence of a urinary device and presence of a central venous catheter. When≥ 2 predictive factors were present, the probability of community-onset P. aeruginosa BSI was nearly 33%, and the area under the receiving operator curve of the multivariate model was0.726. Consistent with both prediction scores, our model has a low positive predictive value and a high negative predictive value for community-onset P. aeruginosa BSI, and a diagnostic accuracy comparable to that reported by Schechner et al. The main strengths of our model are that it includes variables that are easy to collect in real clinical practice and at the patient’s first contact with healthcare, allowing us to detect patients at very low risk of P. aeruginosa BSI.
Some limitations should be kept in mind. First, we did not collect data on the blood culture utilization rate, and although the participating sites collected the majority of blood cultures from their catchment population, we were unable to accurately calculate population-based incidence rates. Second, given the observational nature of our study, causality between the variables included in the model and community-onset P. aeruginosa BSI cannot be fully guaranteed. Nonetheless, similar variables have been previously explored for P. aeruginosa infections [5,7,30]. Furthermore, the low positive probability for community-onset P. aeruginosa BSI in our model, as in previously published models, implies the involvement of other unmeasured variables in the development of this disease. Future research should focus on identifying these as-yet undetected variables. Third, despite the fact that a large national prospective cohort was used, P. aeruginosa CO-BSI was uncommon and the frequency of cases was low. The limited predictive ability of the model is a likely corollary of this. Moreover, it has not been validated in an external cohort. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, our study inferred risk factors for pseudomonal aetiology in CO-BSI compared to Enterobacterales, limiting the population to Gram-negative bacteraemia. Because of this, the clinical utility of the model may be limited to the infections most frequently caused by gram negatives, such as those of biliary tract, intra-abdominal or urinary tract origin. The strengths of the study are prospective data collection and the high number of total cases recordedat26 hospitals indifferent regions of Spain with universal public healthcare coverage of the population, which provides a representative sample of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI in our country and makes it more easily generalizable.

5. Conclusions

Pseudomonas aeruginosa CO-BSI is a difficult entity to predict due to its relatively low incidence in the overall population. However, inappropriate empirical antimicrobial therapy is associated with a worse prognosis and higher mortality in P. aeruginosa CO-BSI. Our model could be useful to detect patients at very low risk of P. aeruginosa CO-BSI in cases of suspected Gram-negative bacteraemia, which would help to avoid overuse of antipseudomonal agents and thus reduce the selective pressure on this and other microorganisms.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics11060707/s1, Supplementary Table S1: Strobe checklist; Supplementary Table S2: Antimicrobial exposure in the previous month. Data are numbers (%) of cases.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.E.L.-C. and J.R.-B.; methodology, P.M.M.P.-C., L.E.L.-C. and J.R.-B.; software, P.M.M.P.-C. and J.F.L.-G.; validation, P.M.M.P.-C. and J.F.L.-G.; formal analysis, P.M.M.P.-C.; investigation, P.M.M.P.-C., J.F.L.-G., P.R.-G., L.E.L.-C., J.M.R.-I., O.L.-R., A.d.A.J., J.F.S., A.J.-S., J.G.A., E.L.J., M.L.C.-B., P.O.L., C.A.C., J.S.B., J.C.P., L.B.-P., B.B.C., A.B.-C., T.M.C., C.N.K., I.M.R.M., C.H.R., I.P.C., D.V.G., F.G.-S., A.S.A., E.M.d.L., A.S.-P., M.G.G., I.L.-H. and the PROBAC REIPI/GEIH-SEIMC/SAEI Group;resources, J.R.-B., L.E.L.-C. and I.L.-H.; data curation, P.M.M.P.-C., J.F.L.-G., Á.R., M.L.C.-B.; writing—original draft preparation, P.M.M.P.-C.; writing—review and editing, P.M.M.P.-C., Á.R., L.E.L.-C., P.R.-G., I.L.-H. and J.R.-B.; visualization, P.M.M.P.-C.; supervision, J.R.-B.; project administration, L.E.L.-C.; funding acquisition, L.E.L.-C. and J.R.-B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was financed by grants from the Plan Nacional de I + D+i 2013–2016-Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Subdirección General de Redes y Centros de Investigación Cooperativa, Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades) [PI16/01432]; and Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI) [RD16/0016/0001; RD16/0016/0008]; co-financed by the European Development Regional Fund “A way to achieve Europe”, Operative program Intelligent Growth 2014–2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The Ethics Committee for research from Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena and Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, approved the study for Andalucía (Código Promotor: FIS-AMO-2016-01). Approval was also obtained at each participating centre outside Andalucía, according to the local ethic committees for research.

Informed Consent Statement

The need for informed written consent was waived because of the observational nature of the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The PROBAC REIPI/GEIH-SEIMC/SAEI Group, María Teresa Pérez Rodríguez (UHU de Vigo), Juan Corzo Delgado (HU Virgen de Valme), María del Carmen Fariñas Álvarez (HU Marqués de Valdecillas), Adrián Sousa Domínguez (H Álvaro Cunqueiro), María ÁngelesMantecón Vallejo (HU Burgos), Marta Arias Temprano (HU de León), Juan Manuel Sánchez Calvo (Hospital de Jerez de la Frontera), Isabel GeaLázaro (CH Ciudad de Jaén), María del Carmen Gálvez (HU Torrecárdenas), Jesús Canueto Quintero (Hospital Punta de Europa).

Conflicts of Interest

L.E.L.-C. has been scientific advisor for Angelini, speaker for Angelini, ViiV, Gilead and Correvio, and has served as trainer for ViiV. P.R.-G. has been scientific advisor for Shionogi, speaker for MSD, Pfizer, and Gilead and has served as trainer for MSD. J.R.-B. has received honoraria from Merck for accredited educational activities. F.G.-S. has served as a speaker for Pfizer and Astellas. The other authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

References

  1. Bearman, G.M.; Wenzel, R.P. Bacteremias: A leading cause of death. Arch. Med. Res. 2005, 36, 646–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Jiménez-Aguilar, P.; López-Cortés, L.E.; Rodríguez-Baño, J. Impact of infectious diseases consultation on the outcome of patients with bacteraemia. Ther. Adv. Infect. Dis. 2019, 6, 2049936119893576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Vidal, F.; Mensa, J.; Almela, M.; Martínez, J.A.; Marco, F.; Casals, C.; Gatell, J.M.; Soriano, E.; de Anta, M.T.J. Epidemiology and outcome of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia, with special emphasis on the influence of antibiotic treatment. Analysis of 189 episodes. Arch. Intern. Med. 1996, 156, 2121–2126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Osmon, S.; Ward, S.; Fraser, V.J.; Kollef, M.H. Hospital mortality for patients with bacteremia due to Staphylococcus aureus or Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Chest 2004, 125, 607–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Rojas, S.; Palacios-Baena, Z.R.; López-Cortés, L.E.; Rodríguez-Baño, J. Rates, predictors and mortality of community-onset bloodstream infections due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2019, 25, 964–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Parkins, M.D.; Gregson, D.B.; Pitout, J.D.; Ross, T.; Laupland, K.B. Population-based study of the epidemiology and risk factors for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection. Infection 2010, 38, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Schechner, V.; Nobre, V.; Kaye, K.S.; Leshno, M.; Giladi, M.; Rohner, P.; Harbarth, S.; Anderson, D.J.; Karchmer, A.W.; Schwaber, M.J.; et al. Gram-Negative Bacteremia upon Hospital Admission: When Should Pseudomonas aeruginosa Be Suspected? Clin. Infect. Dis. 2009, 48, 580–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Pérez-Crespo, P.M.M.; Lanz-García, J.F.; Bravo-Ferrer, J.; Cantón-Bulnes, M.L.; Domínguez, A.S.; Aguirre, J.G.; Reguera-Iglesias, J.M.; Jiménez, E.L.; Castillo, C.A.; Vallejo, M.M.; et al. Revisiting the epidemiology of bloodstream infections and healthcare-associated episodes: Results from a multicentre prospective cohort in Spain (PRO-BAC Study). Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 2021, 58, 106352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. de Bobadilla, E.L.F.; Planes Reig, A.; Rodrıíguez-Creixems, M. Hemocultivos. In Procedimientos en Microbiología Clínica; Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica: Madrid, Spain, 2003; Available online: http://www.seimc.org/documentos/protocolos/microbiologia (accessed on 15 June 2019).
  10. M100-S15; Performance Standards for Antimicrobial SusceptibilityTesting. 15th Informational Supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute CLSI: Wayne, PA, USA, 2005.
  11. von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Egger, M.; Pocock, S.J.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Vandenbroucke, J.P. The strenghtening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Epidemiology 2008, 61, 344–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Charlson, M.E.; Pompei, P.; Ales, K.L.; MacKenzie, C.R. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J. Chronic Dis. 1987, 40, 373–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hilf, M.; Zuravleff, J.J.; Korvick, J.A.; Muder, R.R. Antibiotic therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: Outcome correlations in a prospective study of 200 patients. Am. J. Med. 1989, 87, 540–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Friedman, N.D.; Kaye, K.S.; Stout, J.E.; McGarry, S.A.; Trivette, S.L.; Briggs, J.P.; Lamm, W.; Clark, C.; MacFarquhar, J.; Walton, A.L.; et al. Healthcare-associated bloodstream infections in adults; a reason to change the accepted definition of community-acquired infections. Ann. Intern. Med. 2002, 137, 791–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Levy, M.M.; Fink, M.P.; Marshall, J.C.; Abraham, E.; Angus, D.; Cook, D.; Cohen, J.; Opal, S.M.; Vincent, J.L.; Ramsay, G. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definition Conference. Crit. Care Med. 2003, 31, 1250–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Singer, M.; Deutschman, C.S.; Seymour, C.W.; Shankar-Hari, M.; Annane, D.; Bauer, M.; Bellomo, R.; Bernard, G.R.; Chiche, J.D.; Coopersmith, C.M.; et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016, 315, 801–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wilson, J.; Elgohari, S.; Livermore, D.; Cookson, B.; Johnson, A.; Lamagni, T.; Chronias, A.; Sheridan, E. Trends among pathogens reported as causing bacteraemia in England, 2004–2008. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2011, 17, 451–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Garner, J.S.; Jarvis, W.R.; Emori, T.G.; Horan, T.C.; Hughes, J.M. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections. Am. J. Infect. Control. 1988, 16, 128–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kang, C.-I.; Kim, S.-H.; Park, W.B.; Lee, K.-D.; Kim, H.-B.; Kim, E.-C.; Oh, M.-D.; Choe, K.-W. Clinical features and outcome of patients with community-acquired Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2005, 11, 415–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Peña, C.; Suarez, C.; Gozalo, M.; Murillas, J.; Almirante, B.; Pomar, V.; Aguilar, M.; Granados, A.; Calbo, E.; Rodríguez-Baño, J.; et al. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of carbapenem resistance on mortality in Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections. Antimicrob. AgentsChemother. 2012, 56, 1265–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Zhang, Y.; Chen, X.L.; Huang, A.W.; Liu, S.L.; Liu, W.J.; Zhang, N.; Lu, X.Z. Mortality attributable to carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: A meta-analysis of cohort studies. Emerg. Microbes. Infect. 2016, 5, e27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Chatzinikolaou, I.; Abi-Said, D.; Bodey, G.P.; Rolston, K.V.; Tarrand, J.J.; Samonis, G. Recent experience with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia in patients with cancer: Retrospective analysis of 245 episodes. Arch. Intern. Med. 2000, 160, 501–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Tacconelli, E.; Carrara, E.; Savoldi, A.; Harbarth, S.; Mendelson, M.; Monnet, D.L.; Pulcini, C.; Kahlmeter, G.; Kluytmans, J.; Carmeli, Y.; et al. WHO Pathogens Priority List Working Group. Discovery, research and development of new antibiotics: The WHO priority list of antibiotic resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2018, 18, 318–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. McCarthy, K.L.; Paterson, D.L. Community-acquired Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection: A classification that should not falsely reassure the clinician. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2017, 36, 703–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Carmeli, Y.; Troillet, N.; Eliopoulos, G.M.; Samore, M.H. Emergence of antibiotic resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Comparison of risk associated with different antipseudomonal agents. Antimicrob. AgentsChemother. 1999, 43, 1379–1382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Cheong, H.S.; Kang, C.-I.; Wi, Y.M.; Ko, K.S.; Chung, D.R.; Lee, N.Y.; Song, J.-H.; Peck, K.R. Inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy as a risk factor for mortality in patients with community-onset Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2008, 27, 1219–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Gajdács, M.; Baráth, Z.; Kárpáti, K.; Szabó, D.; Usai, D.; Zsanetti, S.; Donadu, M.G. No Correlation between Biofilm Formation, Virulence Factors, and Antibiotic Resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Results from a Laboratory-Based In Vitro Study. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Cheong, H.S.; Kang, C.-I.; Wi, Y.M.; Kim, E.S.; Lee, J.S.; Ko, K.S.; Chung, D.R.; Lee, N.Y.; Song, J.-H.; Peck, K.R. Clinical significance and predictors of community-onset Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. Am. J. Med. 2008, 121, 709–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Esparcia, A.; Madrazo, M.; Alberola, J.; López-Cruz, I.; Eiros, J.M.; Nogueira, J.M.; Artero, A. Community-onset Pseudomonas aeruginosa urinary sepsis in elderly people: Predictive factors, adequacy of empirical therapy and outcomes. Int. J. Clin.Pract. 2019, 73, e13425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gransden, W.R.; Leibovici, L.; Eykyn, S.J.; Pitlik, S.D.; Samra, Z.; Konisberger, H.; Drucker, M.; Phillips, I. Risk factors and a clinical index for diagnosis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 1995, 1, 119–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Table 1. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, exposure to invasive procedures in the previous 30 days and prosthesis wearers. Data are numbers (%) of cases, except where specified.
Table 1. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, exposure to invasive procedures in the previous 30 days and prosthesis wearers. Data are numbers (%) of cases, except where specified.
VariablesEnterobacterales
(n = 2572)
P. aeruginosa
(n = 78)
p
Male gender1274/2572 (49.9)53/78 (68.8)<0.01
Age, median (IQR)74 (62–83)70 (60–79)0.01
Charlson Index, median (IQR)4 (3–6)5 (3–7)0.32
Diabetes mellitus681/2572 (26.5)16/78 (20.5)0.24
Solid cancer636/2572 (24.7)29/78 (37.2)0.01
Chronic renal insufficiency353/2572 (13.7)11/78 (14.1)0.92
Dementia294/2572 (11.4)7/78 (9)0.50
Chronic pulmonary disease291/2572 (11.3)14/78 (17.9)0.07
Congestiveheartfailure271/2572 (10.5)8/78 (10.3)0.94
Recurrent urinary tract infections270/2572 (10.5)5/78 (6.4)0.24
Cerebrovascular disease266/2572 (10.3)10/78 (12.8)0.48
Immunosuppressive treatment233/2572 (9.1)17/78 (21.8)<0.01
Peripheral vascular disease198/2572 (7.7)5/78 (6.4)0.67
Obstructive urinary disease186/2572 (7.2)11/78 (14.1)0.02
Ischaemic cardiomyopathy184/2572 (7.2)3/78 (3.8)0.26
Chronic hepatic insufficiency180/2572 (7)7/78 (9)0.50
Obstructive biliary disease154/2572 (6)4/78 (5.1)0.75
Haematological malignancy91/2572 (3.5)12/78 (15.4)<0.01
Connective tissue disease76/2572 (3)2/78 (2.6)0.84
Neutropenia < 500 cells/µL36/2572 (1.4)7/78 (9)<0.01
Acquired immune deficiency syndrome 14/2572 (0.5)2/78 (2.6)0.02
Healthcare-related factors
Healthcare-related acquisition950 (36.9)48/78 (61.5)<0.01
Admission toacute care hospitalin the previous 60 days432/2572 (16.8)28/78 (35.9)<0.01
Intravenous therapy a324/2572 (12.6)32/78 (41)<0.01
Outpatient care b313/2572 (12.2)22/78 (28.2)<0.01
Nursing home or long-term care facility a181/2572 (7)2/78 (2.6)0.13
Radiotherapy or chemotherapy a166/2572 (6.5)20/78 (25.6)<0.01
Woundcare or specialised nursing care at home a76/2572 (3)5/78 (6.4)0.08
Admission tochronic care hospital in previous 60 days64/2572 (2.5)2/78 (2.6)0.097
Haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis a43/2572 (1.7)4/78 (5.1)0.03
Exposure toinvasive procedures in previous 30 days
Any vascular catheter823/2572 (32)37/78 (47.4)<0.01
Previous antimicrobials 610/2572 (23.7)29/78 (37.2)<0.01
Urinary catheter232/2572 (9)13/78 (16.7)0.02
Long-term vascular catheter c172/2572 (6.7)19/78 (24.4)<0.01
Major surgery113/2572 (4.4)2/78 (2.6)0.44
Bronchoscopy49/2572 (1.9)4/78 (5.1)0.05
Cystoscopy16/2572 (0.6)1/78 (1.3)0.47
Mechanical ventilation14/2572 (0.5)0/780.51
Transurethral prostate resection14/2572 (0.5)2/78 (2.6)0.02
Colonoscopy13/2572 (0.5)0/780.53
Gastroscopy12/2572 (0.5)0/780.55
Parenteral nutrition9/2572 (0.3)1/78 (1.3)0.19
Prosthesis wearers
Jointprosthesis97/2572 (3.8)0/780.08
Biliary prosthesis82/2572 (3.2)4/78 (5.1)0.34
Ureteric stent55/2572 (2.1)3/78 (3.8)0.31
Nephrostomy52/2572 (2)3/78 (3.8)0.27
Pacemaker/Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator48/2572 (1.9)0/780.22
Prosthetic valves 34/2572 (1.3)1/78 (1.3)0.98
Osteosynthesis implant24/2572 (0.9)1/78 (1.3)0.75
Vascular prosthesis18/2572 (0.7)0/780.46
Ventricular shuntcatheter8/2572 (0.3)0/780.62
Source of bloodstream infection
Urinary tract1520/2572 (49.1)26/78 (33.3)<0.01
Biliary tract498/2572 (19.4)7/78 (9)0.02
Intraabdominal, non-biliary181/2572 (7)2/78 (2.6)0.13
Unknown176/2572 (6.8)10/78 (12.8)0.04
Respiratory tract79/2572 (3.1)13/78 (16.7)<0.01
Skin and soft tissues31/2572 (1.2)4/78 (5.1)<0.01
Vascular catheter21/2572 (0.8)6/78 (7.7)<0.01
Osteoarticular2/2572 (0.1)1/78 (1.3)<0.01
Endocarditis2/2572 (0.1)4/78 (5.1)<0.01
Others16/2572 (0.6)2/78 (2.6)0.04
Severity and outcome
Pitt score > 3148/2572 (5.8)6/78 (7.7)0.47
SOFA ≥ 2785/2572 (30.5)23/78 (29.5)0.85
Severe sepsis/septic shock678/2572 (26.4)20/78 (25.6)0.89
30-day mortality285/2572 (10.9)14/78 (17.9)0.05
IQR: interquartile range; a Previous 30 days; b Two or more attendance to outpatient clinics; c Long-term vascular catheters includes: central venous catheters, Port-a-Cath, peripheral inserted central catheters and tunneled catheters.
Table 2. Independent risk factors for Pseudomonas spp. bloodstream infection in community-onset patients and assignment of scores based on regression coefficients obtained from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Dates expressed as adjusted OR a (95% CI), p value.
Table 2. Independent risk factors for Pseudomonas spp. bloodstream infection in community-onset patients and assignment of scores based on regression coefficients obtained from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Dates expressed as adjusted OR a (95% CI), p value.
VariablesAdjusted a OR (95% CI)pScore Points
Male sex1.89 (1.14–3.12)0.011
Haematological malignancy2.45 (1.20–4.99)0.011
Obstructive uropathy2.86 (1.13–3.02)0.042
Source of infection other than urinary tract, biliary tract, or intra-abdominal6.69 (4.10–10.92)<0.014
Healthcare-related acquisition1.85 (1.13–3.02)0.011
a ORs were adjusted forgender, age, Charlson index, comorbidities, exposure to invasive procedures and devices, source of infection and antimicrobial use in the preceding month.
Table 3. Proportion of patients, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values for different breakpoints according to the score predicting Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection.
Table 3. Proportion of patients, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values for different breakpoints according to the score predicting Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection.
Proportion of PatientsTPFPTNFNSensitivitySpecificityPPVNPVAccuracy
Score ≥ 0100%81257200100.03-0.03
Score ≥ 196.2%7324799380.900.040.020.920.06
Score ≥ 288.5%522297275290.640.110.020.900.12
Score ≥ 385.1%392218354420.480.140.020.890.15
Score ≥ 484.2%352200372460.430.140.020.890.15
Score ≥ 562%281616956530.350.370.020.950.37
Score ≥ 619.3%144982074670.170.810.030.970.79
Score ≥ 75.9%61502422750.070.940.040.970.92
Score ≥ 81.2%3302542780.040.990.090.970.96
Score ≥ 90%0025728101-0.970.97
TP: True Positive; FP: False Positive; TN: True Negative; FN: False Negative; PPV: Positive Predictive Value; NPV: Negative Predictive Value.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martínez Pérez-Crespo, P.M.; Rojas, Á.; Lanz-García, J.F.; Retamar-Gentil, P.; Reguera-Iglesias, J.M.; Lima-Rodríguez, O.; del Arco Jiménez, A.; Fernández Suárez, J.; Jover-Saenz, A.; Goikoetxea Aguirre, J.; et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa Community-Onset Bloodstream Infections: Characterization, Diagnostic Predictors, and Predictive Score Development—Results from the PRO-BAC Cohort. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060707

AMA Style

Martínez Pérez-Crespo PM, Rojas Á, Lanz-García JF, Retamar-Gentil P, Reguera-Iglesias JM, Lima-Rodríguez O, del Arco Jiménez A, Fernández Suárez J, Jover-Saenz A, Goikoetxea Aguirre J, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa Community-Onset Bloodstream Infections: Characterization, Diagnostic Predictors, and Predictive Score Development—Results from the PRO-BAC Cohort. Antibiotics. 2022; 11(6):707. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060707

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martínez Pérez-Crespo, Pedro María, Álvaro Rojas, Joaquín Felipe Lanz-García, Pilar Retamar-Gentil, José María Reguera-Iglesias, Olalla Lima-Rodríguez, Alfonso del Arco Jiménez, Jonathan Fernández Suárez, Alfredo Jover-Saenz, Josune Goikoetxea Aguirre, and et al. 2022. "Pseudomonas aeruginosa Community-Onset Bloodstream Infections: Characterization, Diagnostic Predictors, and Predictive Score Development—Results from the PRO-BAC Cohort" Antibiotics 11, no. 6: 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060707

APA Style

Martínez Pérez-Crespo, P. M., Rojas, Á., Lanz-García, J. F., Retamar-Gentil, P., Reguera-Iglesias, J. M., Lima-Rodríguez, O., del Arco Jiménez, A., Fernández Suárez, J., Jover-Saenz, A., Goikoetxea Aguirre, J., León Jiménez, E., Cantón-Bulnes, M. L., Ortega Lafont, P., Armiñanzas Castillo, C., Sevilla Blanco, J., Cuquet Pedragosa, J., Boix-Palop, L., Becerril Carral, B., Bahamonde-Carrasco, A., ... on behalf of the PROBAC REIPI/GEIH-SEIMC/SAEI Group. (2022). Pseudomonas aeruginosa Community-Onset Bloodstream Infections: Characterization, Diagnostic Predictors, and Predictive Score Development—Results from the PRO-BAC Cohort. Antibiotics, 11(6), 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060707

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop