↓ Skip to main content

Double carbapenem as a rescue strategy for the treatment of severe carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections: a two-center, matched case–control study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, July 2017
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 (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
101 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Double carbapenem as a rescue strategy for the treatment of severe carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections: a two-center, matched case–control study
Published in
Critical Care, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1769-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gennaro De Pascale, Gennaro Martucci, Luca Montini, Giovanna Panarello, Salvatore Lucio Cutuli, Daniele Di Carlo, Valentina Di Gravio, Roberta Di Stefano, Guido Capitanio, Maria Sole Vallecoccia, Piera Polidori, Teresa Spanu, Antonio Arcadipane, Massimo Antonelli

Abstract

Recent reports have suggested the efficacy of a double carbapenem (DC) combination, including ertapenem, for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CR-Kp) infections. We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of such a regimen in critically ill patients. This case-control (1:2), observational, two-center study involved critically ill adults with a microbiologically documented CR-Kp invasive infection treated with the DC regimen matched with those receiving a standard treatment (ST) (i.e., colistin, tigecycline, or gentamicin). The primary end point was 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were clinical cure, microbiological eradication, duration of mechanical ventilation and of vasopressors, and 90-day mortality. Forty-eight patients treated with DC were matched with 96 controls. Occurrence of septic shock at infection and high procalcitonin levels were significantly more frequent in patients receiving DC treatment (p < 0.01). The 28-day mortality was significantly higher in patients receiving ST compared with the DC group (47.9% vs 29.2%, p = 0.04). Similarly, clinical cure and microbiological eradication were significantly higher when DC was used in patients infected with CR-Kp strains resistant to colistin (13/20 (65%) vs 10/32 (31.3%), p = 0.03 and 11/19 (57.9%) vs 7/27 (25.9%), p = 0.04, respectively). In the logistic regression and multivariate Cox-regression models, the DC regimen was associated with a reduction in 28-day mortality (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.87 and OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.79, respectively). Improved 28-day mortality was associated with the DC regimen compared with ST for severe CR-Kp infections. A randomized trial is needed to confirm these observational results. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03094494 . Registered 28 March 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 101 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 139 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 18 13%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Master 12 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Other 37 27%
Unknown 31 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 40%
Immunology and Microbiology 13 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 39 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 21 August 2019.
All research outputs
#732,947
of 25,382,250 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#527
of 6,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,100
of 318,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#8
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,250 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 318,774 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 98 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 92% of its contemporaries.