Next Article in Journal
Unraveling the Microbial Symphony: Impact of Antibiotics and Probiotics on Infant Gut Ecology and Antibiotic Resistance in the First Six Months of Life
Next Article in Special Issue
Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes: Healthcare Providers’ Perspectives on Adopted Hospital Policies That Combat Antibacterial Resistance in Selected Health Facilities in Uganda
Previous Article in Journal
Development and ELISA Characterization of Antibodies against the Colistin, Vancomycin, Daptomycin, and Meropenem: A Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Antimicrobial Stewardship in the Emergency Department Observation Unit: Definition of a New Indicator and Evaluation of Antimicrobial Use and Clinical Outcomes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 13
Issue 7
10.3390/antibiotics13070601
antibiotics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Risk Factors for 30-Day Mortality in Nosocomial Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections

by
Verena Zerbato
1,*,
Riccardo Pol
1,
Gianfranco Sanson
2,
Daniel Alexandru Suru
3,
Eugenio Pin
4,
Vanessa Tabolli
5,
Jacopo Monticelli
1,
Marina Busetti
6,
Dan Alexandru Toc
7,
Lory Saveria Crocè
2,8,
Roberto Luzzati
2 and
Stefano Di Bella
2
1
Infectious Diseases Unit, Trieste University Hospital (ASUGI), 34125 Trieste, Italy
2
Clinical Department of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, Trieste University, 34129 Trieste, Italy
3
Sports and Exercise Medicine Division, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, 35128 Padua, Italy
4
Medical Emergency Service, Trieste University Hospital (ASUGI), 34125 Trieste, Italy
5
Department of Health Science, Section of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy
6
Microbiology Unit, Trieste University Hospital (ASUGI), 34125 Trieste, Italy
7
Department of Microbiology, “Iuliu Hațieganu” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
8
Liver Clinic, Trieste University Hospital (ASUGI), 34125 Trieste, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2024, 13(7), 601; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13070601
Submission received: 20 May 2024 / Revised: 17 June 2024 / Accepted: 25 June 2024 / Published: 27 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial Stewardship and Use in Healthcare Setting)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Enterococci commonly cause nosocomial bloodstream infections (BSIs), and the global incidence of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) BSIs is rising. This study aimed to assess the risk factors for enterococcal BSIs and 30-day mortality, stratified by Enterococcus species, vancomycin resistance, and treatment appropriateness. We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2014–2021) including all hospitalized adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for Enterococcus faecalis or Enterococcus faecium. We included 584 patients with enterococcal BSI: 93 were attributed to vancomycin-resistant E. faecium. The overall 30-day mortality was 27.5%; higher in cases of BSI due to vancomycin-resistant E. faecium (36.6%) and vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium (31.8%) compared to E. faecalis BSIs (23.2%) (p = 0.016). This result was confirmed by multivariable Cox analysis. Independent predictors of increased mortality included the PITT score, complicated bacteremia, and age (HR = 1.269, p < 0.001; HR = 1.818, p < 0.001; HR = 1.022, p = 0.005, respectively). Conversely, male gender, consultation with infectious disease (ID) specialists, and appropriate treatment were associated with reduced mortality (HR = 0.666, p = 0.014; HR = 0.504, p < 0.001; HR = 0.682, p = 0.026, respectively). In conclusion, vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia is independently associated with a higher risk of 30-day mortality.

1. Introduction

The Enterococcus species are a common cause of nosocomial bacteremia. In the United States, enterococci are the first most common bacteria causing central line-associated bloodstream infections (BSIs) in long-term acute-care hospitals [1]. In 2019, the Enterococcus species ranked second among pathogens responsible for intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired BSIs in Europe [2].
Two species cause most of the enterococcal infections in humans: Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium [3]. Other species involved in human infections are as follows: E. casseliflavus, E. gallinarum, E. raffinosus, E. avium, and E. durans [4,5]. Enterococci are not highly virulent bacteria. Typical enterococcal virulence factors are cytolysin, pili, gelatinase, aggregation substance, and extracellular surface proteins. These virulence factors contribute to the ability of enterococci to form biofilms [6]. Most of them are absent in E. faecium. Moreover, E. faecalis and E. faecium have different patterns of acquired antimicrobial resistance, and these are more frequently observed in E. faecium, such as with penicillins and glycopeptides [3]. Most E. faecium isolates exhibit ampicillin resistance, which is mainly due to the production of low-affinity penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs), especially PBP5. In contrast, high-level penicillin resistance in E. faecalis is much less common. While glycopeptide resistance can be found in both E. faecalis and E. faecium, it is more frequently associated with E. faecium [3,7,8].
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is known to be a leading cause of death around the world [9]. Recently, the European Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators conducted a cross-country systematic analysis about bacterial antimicrobial resistance in the World Health Organization (WHO) European region in 2019. They estimated that 541,000 deaths were associated with bacterial AMR, and 47,200 of these were attributable to bloodstream infections. E. faecium was one of the seven pathogens responsible for most deaths associated with AMR [10]. AMR is also a serious threat to public health and national health systems. In this regard, nosocomial vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) colonization [11] and infections significantly increase hospital costs [12].
A retrospective multicenter study, conducted in Italy from 2011 to 2017, found a progressive increase in the incidence of enterococcal bacteremia, and particularly those caused by vancomycin-resistant (VR) E. faecium. Resistance to ampicillin was detected in 6.8% and 89.1% of E. faecalis and E. faecium bacteremia cases, respectively. Resistance to vancomycin was detected in 1.3% and 14.1% of E. faecalis and E. faecium bacteremia cases, respectively. Resistance to tigecycline and linezolid was rarely observed [13].
Sources of enterococcal bacteremia usually are urinary and found in the gastrointestinal tract for community-acquired BSIs and intravascular and urinary catheters for hospital-acquired bacteremia [14]. In almost 20% of cases, the source of infection is not identified [15]. Most cases of enterococcal bacteremia are caused by E. faecalis, followed by E. faecium [15]. Polymicrobial bacteremia is often observed, ranging from 25% to 50% of enterococcal BSIs, depending on the study considered, and is usually associated with abdominal sources of infections [15,16]. The main risk factors for enterococcal BSIs are advanced age, immunosuppression, nosocomial infection under broad-spectrum antibiotics, prior enterococcal infections or colonization, recent surgery (mainly urinary or intra-abdominal), comorbidities related to urogenital and intra-abdominal organs, and presence of intravascular devices and/or indwelling urinary catheters [15].
Enterococcal BSIs are associated with high mortality rates, from 20% to 40% [15,17]. Before the approval of effective drugs for VRE strains, such as daptomycin and linezolid, two systematic reviews compared the outcomes of VRE versus vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus (VSE) bacteremia. Both studies found an increased risk of mortality for VRE bacteremia (relative risk [RR], 2.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.13–2.66; odds ratio [OR], 2.52; 95% CI, 1.87–3.39) [18,19]. In 2016, Prematunge et al. conducted a meta-analysis of 11 studies comparing VRE versus VSE bacteremia, confirming that VRE bacteremia is associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and length of stay (LOS) [20]. Kramer et al., in 2018, in a retrospective cohort study on patients with enterococcal bacteremia, reported that in-hospital mortality and infection-attributed hospital stay are not influenced by vancomycin resistance but by the Enterococcus species (E. faecium is an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality) [21]. More recently, a systematic review and meta-analysis found out a higher mortality for VR E. faecium bacteremia compared with vancomycin-sensitive (VS) E. faecium BSI (RR 1.46; 95% CI 1.17–1.82), while no difference was observed when comparing VR E. faecium vs. VR E. faecalis BSI (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.52–1.93) [22]. Thus, according to the available studies, we cannot draw definitive conclusions about the outcome of enterococcal bacteremia.
The main aim of the present study is to investigate the risk factors for 30-day mortality for enterococcal BSIs, according to the Enterococcus species, resistance to vancomycin and appropriate treatment.

2. Results

During the study period, a total of 618 patients with enterococcal bacteremia were considered for inclusion. We excluded the following: 2 episodes for missing antimicrobial susceptibility test, 24 episodes because of species other than E. faecalis or E. faecium (10 Enterococcus casseliflavus, 5 Enterococcus gallinarum, 4 Enterococcus avium, 3 Enterococcus durans, 1 Enterococcus hirae, and 1 Enterococcus raffinosus), 5 episodes for concomitant E. faecalis and E. faecium, and 3 for missing species type.
Eventually, we included 584 patients with enterococcal bacteremia. Eleven patients had two separate episodes of enterococcal bacteremia (ten patients with the same species of Enterococcus, one patient had one E. faecalis BSI, and another one caused by E. faecium).

2.1. VRE Annual Prevalence

Only three E. faecalis BSIs, one observed in 2019 and two in 2020, were resistant to vancomycin. We excluded these patients from uni- and multivariate analysis due to the low number of strains isolated. A total of 93 vancomycin-resistant E. faecium were identified over the study period. The proportion of vancomycin-resistant E. faecium increased from 6.45% (n = 2/31) in 2014 to 51.06% (n = 24/47) in 2021 (Table 1).

2.2. Population Analysis According to Species and Vancomycin Susceptibility

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the included patients according to Enterococcus species and resistance to vancomycin are described in Table 2.
The mean age of the total study population was 73.3 ± 12.2 years; 382 (65.2%) patients were males (65.2%).
We observed 340 episodes of vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis BSI, 148 episodes of vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium BSI and 93 vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia.
For the majority of cases of E. faecalis BSI, the source of infection was urologic, while an intra-abdominal focus was predominant in E. faecium BSIs (p < 0.001).
Hospital LOS before BSI diagnosis was significantly longer for vancomycin-resistant E. faecium, compared with other groups (22.3 ± 24.2 days vs. 13.3 ± 22.7 for VS E. faecalis and 16.6 ± 17.9 for VR E. faecium, p = 0.002). Previous chemotherapy and chronic immunosuppressive therapy were reported in 16.2% (p < 0.001) and 14.9% (p = 0.006) of VS E. faecium BSIs, respectively. Among patients receiving chronic immunosuppressive therapy (n = 59), seventeen were solid organ transplant recipients, and two were hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients. Only two patients had HIV infection. Between 2020 and 2021, nine patients with moderate/severe COVID-19 were diagnosed with enterococcal BSI. All of them received steroids during their hospital stay. Three patients received tocilizumab.
Infectious disease (ID) specialist consultation was conducted in 74.2% of vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia, compared with 41.5% and 42.6% of vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis and E. faecium BSIs, respectively (p < 0.001).
No statistically significant difference was found in complicated BSI rates according to enterococcal species and vancomycin resistance (p = 0.055). Approximately 59.8% of females had complicated bacteremia compared to 53.9% of males. Infective endocarditis was largely caused by E. faecalis (n = 28, p = 0.014).
Empirical therapy was initiated in 570 patients (98.1%). However, appropriate antimicrobial treatment commenced for only 350 patients (60.2%). Specifically, 65.9% of patients with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis bacteremia received appropriate antimicrobial therapy compared to 37.2% and 28% of those with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium and vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs, respectively (p < 0.001).
We observed only nine cases of Clostridioides difficile infection within 60 days of discontinuing therapy. Relapse of bacteremia within 60 days of discontinuing therapy occurred in 17 patients (for seven of them, source control was not performed).
We observed a total of 160 deaths within the 30 days following the first positive blood culture (BC) for E. faecalis or E. faecium. There were 79 deaths among patients with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis BSIs (30-day mortality rate: 23.2%), 47 in those with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium BSIs (30-day mortality rate: 31.8%) and 34 in those with vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia (30-day mortality rate: 36.6%), p = 0.016.

2.3. Population Analysis According to Mortality

Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients and bacteria according to 30 day-mortality after BSI diagnosis are described in Table 3.
Regarding the ward upon BSI diagnosis, 23.6% of patients were hospitalized in the ICU. Only 54% of them survived, while 30-day mortality rates in medical and surgical wards were lower (24.7% and 16.3%, respectively; p < 0.001).
Complicated BSIs were observed in 65.4% of deceased patients compared to 52.4% of surviving patients (p = 0.004).
Appropriate antimicrobial treatment was started in 41.4% of deceased patients compared to 56.4% of surviving patients (p < 0.001). ID specialist consultation was performed in 273 patients (47% of the total). Approximately 79.9% of surviving patients received an ID consultation, while the survival rate decreased in the group that did not receive it (p < 0.001).
The 30-day mortality was analyzed through a multivariable Cox model (Table 4). Cox regression analysis confirmed an adjusted higher 30-day mortality rate for vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia compared to vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium BSIs and vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis BSIs (Figure 1). The risk of death was higher for patients with complicated BSIs, higher PITT scores, and older age, while male gender, ID consultation, and appropriate antimicrobial treatment were predictive of lower mortality rates (Table 4).
For patients receiving an appropriate antimicrobial treatment, the sensitivity analysis confirmed a lowered risk for 30-day mortality only for patients with E. faecalis BSI (Figure 2).

3. Discussion

The burden of enterococcal BSIs is increasing worldwide [1]. Our country observed an increasing incidence of vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia over the last few years [13]. We calculated the annual prevalence of vancomycin-resistant strains on the total enterococcal BSIs reported at our Institution between 2014 and 2021. We observed 93 vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs, and only 3 vancomycin-resistant E. faecalis BSIs. The prevalence of VR E. faecium bacteremia has increased from 6.45% in 2014 to 51.06% in 2021. However, most cases of BSIs were caused by E. faecalis (343 over a total of 584 bacteremia, 58.73%).
The origin of enterococcal bacteremia was identified mainly as urologic or intra-abdominal for E. faecalis and as intra-abdominal for E. faecium (both for VRE and VSE strains). The source of infection has not been identified in 19.4% of overall cases. These observations are in line with other cohort studies [23,24]. Hospital LOS before BSI diagnosis was significantly longer for patients with vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs. This reflects the current evidence of a major involvement of E. faecium in nosocomial infections rather than the community-acquired ones [20,25].
Another interesting point concerns polymicrobial bacteremia. Usually 25–50% of enterococcal bacteremia are polymicrobial and have an abdominal origin [15,16]. In our study, we identified 187 cases of polymicrobial bacteremia, accounting for 31.9% of the total cases. In 99 instances, in addition to Enterococcus, bacteria from the Enterobacteriaceae family were also detected. The mortality rates for both polymicrobial and monomicrobial enterococcal bacteremia cases in our cohort were similar. As our data collection focused solely on therapies targeting Enterococcus species, we could not evaluate the appropriateness of antimicrobial treatment for the other isolated bacteria. However, our results are consistent with those reported by Lagnf et al. [16], in the only study known to us conducted with a focus on the outcome of polymicrobial enterococcal bacteremia.
Among major risk factors for enterococcal BSIs we have to consider advanced age, immunosuppression, and recent abdominal surgery [15]. Considering our cohort, older patients had a higher 30-day mortality rate (still significant in multivariable analysis). Chronic immunosuppressive therapy and previous chemotherapy were significantly associated with E. faecium bacteremia (both vancomycin-sensitive and resistant), as highlighted previously [26]. Recent abdominal surgery was not identified as a risk factor for enterococcal BSI and for 30-day mortality.
The risk factors for VRE bacteremia are mainly prior vancomycin use and VRE colonization [25]. Glycopeptide exposure before BSI diagnosis was not identified as a risk factor for enterococcal VR E. faecium BSI and for 30-day mortality in our cohort. At our institution, rectal swabs for the detection of VRE colonization are not routinely carried out in every ward. Thus, we did not analyze this variable. VR Enterococcus faecium colonization is also a risk factor for C. difficile infections in particular populations, such as HSCT recipients [27]. We reported only nine cases of CDI in our cohort. Consequently, we cannot stratify these data according to the Enterococcus species or vancomycin susceptibility.
Our study confirmed that the 30-day mortality rate was higher for vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs (30-day mortality rate: 36.6%) compared with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium BSIs (30-day mortality rate: 31.8%) and vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis BSIs (30-day mortality rate: 23.2%). The multivariate analysis confirmed these observations. In particular, the risk of death was 1.5 and 2.0 times higher for vancomycin-sensitive and vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs, respectively. The 30-day mortality rate in the group of patients who received an ID specialist dropped by 50% compared with the group who did not receive it (HR = 0.504, p < 0.001). These data are not new, but they reinforce the importance of bundles for the management of enterococcal BSI [28]. Male gender was associated with lower 30-day mortality (HR = 0.666, p = 0.014). Recently, a meta-analysis found a male/female ratio in VRE BSIs of 1.4 [29]. To the best of our knowledge, there are no other studies that have observed the protective role of being male in enterococcal BSIs. This result could be due to the higher proportion of complicated bacteremia in females compared to that in males. In the multivariate analysis, complicated bacteremia was associated with a higher 30-day mortality rate. There is not a consensus for the definition of enterococcal complicated bacteremia. We must mention two potential biases when considering our definition of complicated BSI. Firstly, given the retrospective design of our study, we were not able to properly assess positive follow-up blood cultures because they are not routinely performed by clinicians. Secondly, we considered all primary bacteremia and all bacteremia without control of infections’ sources as complicated.
While E. faecium is generally considered less virulent than E. faecalis [3], infections caused by E. faecium are associated with higher mortality rates and longer lengths of hospital stay [20], a trend corroborated by our study. Several potential explanations, though not conclusive, can be proposed. Firstly, the peculiar intrinsic and acquired antimicrobial resistance profile of E. faecium presents challenges in treatment [3]. Secondly, patients with E. faecium infections tend to be more medically fragile and have a higher burden of comorbidities [20]. Thirdly, given the relatively few therapeutic options for VRE BSIs, it is easier to miss the right empiric treatment compared to E. faecalis BSIs. Additionally, other less explored factors may contribute, such as disparities in biofilm formation between E. faecalis and E. faecium [30], as well as variations in host immune responses.
The multivariate analysis evidenced how an appropriate treatment was associated with a 30% reduction in the adjusted risk of death; however, this association was confirmed only for E. faecalis BSIs in the subgroup analysis. Inappropriate antibiotic therapy has already been identified as an independent risk factor for mortality in enterococcal bacteremia [31]. Recently, Russo et al. observed that starting an appropriate therapy for VRE bacteremia within 48 h from blood culture collection was independently associated with improved survival [32]. In this study, we did not assess the impact of different timing for appropriate treatment on 30-day mortality.
Our work has some limitations that deserve to be considered when interpreting the results. First, this is a retrospective study. Second, this study was conducted in only one hospital. Third, we did not consider active therapy against other isolated bacteria (for polymicrobial bacteremia) or stratify the analysis for different antimicrobial regimens. Finally, the definition we have chosen for appropriate therapy is arbitrary and not standardized. The strengths of this study are the long study period (from 2014 to 2021), the large sample (584 enrolled patients), and the fact that we made comparisons not only between VRE and VSE BSIs but also between E. faecalis and E. faecium BSIs.
Our future objectives are to enroll more patients through a multicentric study including enterococcal bacteremia from other Italian and European Hospitals, focus also on Enterococcus species other than E. faecalis or E. faecium, and assess the impact of different timing for appropriate treatment on 30-day mortality, according to different antimicrobial regimens.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Objectives of This Study

The aims of this study were as follows: (1) to calculate the annual prevalence of vancomycin-resistant strains on total enterococcal BSIs reported at our institution between 2014 and 2021; (2) to investigate risk factors for enterococcal BSIs, according to the Enterococcus species and resistance to vancomycin; and (3) to investigate risk factors for 30-day mortality, according to bacteria characteristics (Enterococcus species and resistance to vancomycin) and appropriate treatment.

4.2. Study Design and Population

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Trieste University Hospital, Italy. All adult patients (aged > 18 years) hospitalized at our institution with at least one BC positive for Enterococcus faecalis or Enterococcus faecium during hospital stay were included. The study period ranges from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2021.
Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) pregnancy; (2) BCs positive for species other than E. faecalis and E. faecium; (3) lack of antimicrobial susceptibility test of isolated Enterococcus; (4) lack of Enterococcus typing; and (5) BCs positive for both E. faecalis and E. faecium at the same time. Additionally, duplicate BCs (up to 60 days following the last positive culture for the same Enterococcus spp.) from the same patient were excluded.

4.3. Data Collection and Definitions

The following data were retrospectively collected from hospital electronic medical records: demographics (age and gender); comorbidities; chronic therapy; previous exposure to glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin); date of hospital admission; date of first positive BC; result of the in vitro susceptibility testing; source of infection; ICU admission and PITT score [33] at BSI diagnosis; ID specialist consultation; treatment prescribed for enterococcal BSI; evidence of polymicrobial bacteremia and complicated bacteremia; date of hospital discharge and date of death; relapse of bacteremia and Clostridioides difficile infection within 60 days of discontinuing therapy. We defined a new BSI caused by the same organism within 60 days of clinical and microbiological resolution of a previously treated BSI as a relapse. After 60 days, we considered the new BSI as a separate episode.
According to the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC), possible sources of infection were classified as catheter-related, urologic, intra-abdominal, heart/cardiovascular devices, bone/skin/soft tissue, and unknown. In this last case, the bacteremia was defined as primary [34].
Enterococcal bacteremia was defined complicated when at least one of the following features were present: (a) infective endocarditis, (b) device-associated infection, (c) metastatic infection, (d) source control not done, (e) positive follow up BCs after 48–72 h, and (f) persistency of fever after 48–72 h from first positive BC. In the case of primary bacteremia, the source control was automatically defined as not documented and, therefore, not done. Enterococcal bacteremia was defined as polymicrobial when at least one non-enterococcal bacterial species was isolated from the same blood culture as Enterococcus spp. and met the CDC criteria for bloodstream infection [34].
Appropriate antibiotic therapy was defined as an active therapy against isolated bacteria started within 24 h from BSI diagnosis and continued for at least five days. Antibiotic therapy was defined as active in accordance with in vitro isolate susceptibility.
The treatment prescribed for enterococcal BSI was documented as follows: time to empiric therapy; time to pathogen-specific therapy; duration of pathogen-specific therapy.
Antibiotic regimens that we considered appropriate are listed in Supplementary Materials S1.
All isolates were identified by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’Etoile, France), while antimicrobial susceptibility was assessed with the Vitek2 system (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’Etoile, France). Resistance to vancomycin was defined when a minimal inhibitory concentration > 4 was detected, according to the EUCAST criteria.
Mortality was defined as death of any cause within the 30 days following the first positive BC for E. faecalis or E. faecium.
All data were pseudonymized via a web-based central, password-protected clinical database management system.

4.4. Statistics

Continuous variables were presented as means ± standard deviations (SD). The between-group comparisons were analyzed via Student’s t test for independent samples after determining whether or not equal variance could be attributed to the subgroups as per Levene’s test. Nominal variables were shown as a number and percentage, and the respective contingency tables were analyzed using χ test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate.
The prevalence of vancomycin resistance among E. faecium was calculated as the number of resistant strains over the total number of E. faecium isolates.
The 30-day mortality was analyzed according to bacteria characteristics (Enterococcus species and resistance to vancomycin) and appropriate treatment through multivariable Cox proportional hazards models with forward stepwise selection. The results were presented as an adjusted proportional hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Aiming at examining the potential impact of survival bias among the patients receiving or not receiving an appropriate antimicrobial therapy, 30-day mortality was computed separately among bacteria subgroups for sensitivity analysis.
A p-value < 0.05 was set for statistical significance.
All statistical analyses were performed using the software IBM SPSS Statistics, version 24.0 (New York, NY, USA: IBM Corp.).

5. Conclusions

The mortality rate of enterococcal bacteremia is high. Our study confirms that vancomycin-resistant E. faecium bacteremia is independently associated with a higher risk of 30-day mortality, and delayed appropriate antimicrobial treatment is associated with a higher mortality rate. However, the employment of ID specialist consultation and appropriate antimicrobial therapy, along with patients’ male gender, were associated with significant lower mortality rates.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics13070601/s1. File S1. Appropriate Therapy.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.Z., and S.D.B.; methodology, V.Z., G.S., and S.D.B.; investigation, V.Z., R.P., D.A.S., E.P., V.T., J.M., M.B., L.S.C., D.A.T., and R.L.; writing, review and editing, V.Z., G.S., J.M., L.S.C., D.A.T., R.L., and S.D.B.; supervision, G.S., R.L., and S.D.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of University of Trieste (Date 28 June 2022/N°V123).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets analyzed during the current study are not publicly available but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the employees of our institution’s archive. We particularly thank Tatiana.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

References

  1. Weiner-Lastinger, L.M.; Abner, S.; Edwards, J.R.; Kallen, A.J.; Karlsson, M.; Magill, S.S.; Pollock, D.; See, I.; Soe, M.M.; Walters, M.S.; et al. Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens Associated with Adult Healthcare-Associated Infections: Summary of Data Reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2015–2017. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2020, 41, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Healthcare-Associated Infections Acquired in Intensive Care Units—Annual Epidemiological Report for 2019. Available online: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/healthcare-associated-infections-intensive-care-units-2019 (accessed on 27 March 2024).
  3. García-Solache, M.; Rice, L.B. The Enterococcus: A Model of Adaptability to Its Environment. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2019, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Monticelli, J.; Knezevich, A.; Luzzati, R.; Di Bella, S. Clinical Management of Non-Faecium Non-Faecalis Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci Infection. Focus on Enterococcus Gallinarum and Enterococcus Casseliflavus/flavescens. J. Infect. Chemother. 2018, 24, 237–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Toc, D.A.; Pandrea, S.L.; Botan, A.; Mihaila, R.M.; Costache, C.A.; Colosi, I.A.; Junie, L.M. Enterococcus Raffinosus, Enterococcus Durans and Enterococcus Avium Isolated from a Tertiary Care Hospital in Romania-Retrospective Study and Brief Review. Biology 2022, 11, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Șchiopu, P.; Toc, D.A.; Colosi, I.A.; Costache, C.; Ruospo, G.; Berar, G.; Șg, G.; Ghilea, A.C.; Botan, A.; Pană, A.G.; et al. An Overview of the Factors Involved in Biofilm Production by the Enterococcus Genus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 11577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cairns, K.A.; Udy, A.A.; Peel, T.N.; Abbott, I.J.; Dooley, M.J.; Peleg, A.Y. Therapeutics for Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2023, 36, e0005922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Bonten, M.J.; Willems, R.; Weinstein, R.A. Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci: Why Are They Here, and Where Do They Come From? Lancet Infect. Dis. 2001, 1, 314–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Cassini, A.; Plachouras, D.; Monnet, D.L. Attributable Deaths Caused by Infections with Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria in France—Authors’ Reply. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, 129–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. European Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. The Burden of Bacterial Antimicrobial Resistance in the WHO European Region in 2019: A Cross-Country Systematic Analysis. Lancet Public Health 2022, 7, E897–E913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Engler-Hüsch, S.; Heister, T.; Mutters, N.T.; Wolff, J.; Kaier, K. In-Hospital Costs of Community-Acquired Colonization with Multidrug-Resistant Organisms at a German Teaching Hospital. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2018, 18, 737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Puchter, L.; Chaberny, I.F.; Schwab, F.; Vonberg, R.-P.; Bange, F.-C.; Ebadi, E. Economic Burden of Nosocomial Infections Caused by Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control. 2018, 7, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Monticelli, J.; Di Bella, S.; Giacobbe, D.R.; Amato, G.; Antonello, R.M.; Barone, E.; Brachelente, G.; Busetti, M.; Carcione, D.; Carretto, E.; et al. Trends in the Incidence and Antibiotic Resistance of Enterococcal Bloodstream Isolates: A 7-Year Retrospective Multicenter Epidemiological Study in Italy. Microb. Drug Resist. 2021, 27, 529–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bennett, J.E.; Dolin, R.; Blaser, M.J. Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases: 2-Volume Set; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; ISBN 9780323482554. [Google Scholar]
  15. Del Turco, E.R.; Bartoletti, M.; Dahl, A.; Cervera, C.; Pericàs, J.M. How Do I Manage a Patient with Enterococcal Bacteraemia? Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2021, 27, 364–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lagnf, A.M.; Zasowski, E.J.; Claeys, K.C.; Casapao, A.M.; Rybak, M.J. Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Risk Factors in Polymicrobial versus Monomicrobial Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections. Am. J. Infect. Control. 2016, 44, 917–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Beganovic, M.; Luther, M.K.; Rice, L.B.; Arias, C.A.; Rybak, M.J.; LaPlante, K.L. A Review of Combination Antimicrobial Therapy for Enterococcus Faecalis Bloodstream Infections and Infective Endocarditis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2018, 67, 303–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Salgado, C.D.; Farr, B.M. Outcomes Associated with Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci: A Meta-Analysis. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2003, 24, 690–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. DiazGranados, C.A.; Jernigan, J.A. Impact of Vancomycin Resistance on Mortality among Patients with Neutropenia and Enterococcal Bloodstream Infection. J. Infect. Dis. 2005, 191, 588–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Prematunge, C.; MacDougall, C.; Johnstone, J.; Adomako, K.; Lam, F.; Robertson, J.; Garber, G. VRE and VSE Bacteremia Outcomes in the Era of Effective VRE Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2016, 37, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kramer, T.S.; Remschmidt, C.; Werner, S.; Behnke, M.; Schwab, F.; Werner, G.; Gastmeier, P.; Leistner, R. The Importance of Adjusting for Enterococcus Species When Assessing the Burden of Vancomycin Resistance: A Cohort Study Including over 1000 Cases of Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2018, 7, 133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Eichel, V.M.; Last, K.; Brühwasser, C.; von Baum, H.; Dettenkofer, M.; Götting, T.; Grundmann, H.; Güldenhöven, H.; Liese, J.; Martin, M.; et al. Epidemiology and Outcomes of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Hosp. Infect. 2023, 141, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Falcone, M.; Tiseo, G.; Dentali, F.; Foglia, E.; Campanini, M.; Menichetti, F.; Mazzone, A. Early Alert from the Microbiology Laboratory Improves the Outcome of Elderly Patients with Enterococcus Spp. Bloodstream Infection: Results from a Multicentre Prospective Study. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2019, 18, 139–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rottier, W.C.; Pinholt, M.; van der Bij, A.K.; Arpi, M.; Blank, S.N.; Nabuurs-Franssen, M.H.; Gjhm, R.; Tersmette, M.; Ossewaarde, J.M.; Groenwold, R.H.; et al. Attributable Mortality of Vancomycin Resistance in Ampicillin-Resistant Enterococcus Faecium Bacteremia in Denmark and the Netherlands: A Matched Cohort Study. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2022, 43, 719–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Reyes, K.; Bardossy, A.C.; Zervos, M. Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci: Epidemiology, Infection Prevention, and Control. Infect. Dis. Clin. N. Am. 2016, 30, 953–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ornstein, M.C.; Mukherjee, S.; Keng, M.; Elson, P.; Tiu, R.V.; Saunthararajah, Y.; Maggiotto, A.; Schaub, M.; Banks, D.; Advani, A.; et al. Impact of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcal Bacteremia on Outcome during Acute Myeloid Leukemia Induction Therapy. Leuk. Lymphoma 2015, 56, 2536–2542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Di Bella, S.; Sanson, G.; Monticelli, J.; Zerbato, V.; Principe, L.; Giuffrè, M.; Pipitone, G.; Luzzati, R. Infection: History, Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Prevention, Clinical Manifestations, Treatment, and Future Options. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2024, 37, e00135-23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bartoletti, M.; Tedeschi, S.; Scudeller, L.; Pascale, R.; Del Turco, E.R.; Trapani, F.; Tumietto, F.; Virgili, G.; Marconi, L.; Ianniruberto, S.; et al. Impact on Mortality of a Bundle for the Management of Enterococcal Bloodstream Infection. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2019, 6, ofz473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Correa-Martínez, C.L.; Schuler, F.; Kampmeier, S. Sex Differences in Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci Bloodstream Infections—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Biol. Sex Differ. 2021, 12, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ch’ng, J.H.; Chong, K.K.L.; Lam, L.N.; Wong, J.J.; Kline, K.A. Biofilm-Associated Infection by Enterococci. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2019, 17, 82–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Suppli, M.; Aabenhus, R.; Harboe, Z.B.; Andersen, L.P.; Tvede, M.; Jensen, J.U. Mortality in Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections Increases with Inappropriate Antimicrobial Therapy. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2011, 17, 1078–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Russo, A.; Picciarella, A.; Russo, R.; d’Ettorre, G.; Ceccarelli, G. Time to Effective Therapy Is an Important Determinant of Survival in Bloodstream Infections Caused by Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus spp. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 11925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chow, J.W.; Yu, V.L. Combination Antibiotic Therapy versus Monotherapy for Gram-Negative Bacteraemia: A Commentary. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 1999, 11, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/pdfs/pscmanual/pcsmanual_current.pdf (accessed on 31 March 2024).
Antibiotics 13 00601 g001
Figure 1. Adjusted Kaplan–Meier curves for the proportional risk of 30-day death in patients with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis BSIs, vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium BSIs, and vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs. HR: hazard ratio. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. BSI: bloodstream infection.
Figure 1. Adjusted Kaplan–Meier curves for the proportional risk of 30-day death in patients with vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis BSIs, vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium BSIs, and vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSIs. HR: hazard ratio. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. BSI: bloodstream infection.
Antibiotics 13 00601 g001
Antibiotics 13 00601 g002
Figure 2. Adjusted Kaplan–Meier curves for the proportional risk of 30-day death in patients receiving or not receiving appropriate antimicrobial treatment according to the isolated bacteria (A) vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis, (B) vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium, and (C) vancomycin-resistant E. faecium. HR: hazard ratio. CI: confidence interval. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. BSI: bloodstream infection.
Figure 2. Adjusted Kaplan–Meier curves for the proportional risk of 30-day death in patients receiving or not receiving appropriate antimicrobial treatment according to the isolated bacteria (A) vancomycin-sensitive E. faecalis, (B) vancomycin-sensitive E. faecium, and (C) vancomycin-resistant E. faecium. HR: hazard ratio. CI: confidence interval. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. BSI: bloodstream infection.
Antibiotics 13 00601 g002
Table 1. Annual prevalence of vancomycin-resistant strains on total enterococcal BSIs.
Table 1. Annual prevalence of vancomycin-resistant strains on total enterococcal BSIs.
YearE. faecium BSIsVR E. faecium BSIsAnnual Prevalence
20143126.45%
2015281035.71%
2016271140.74%
2017311135.48%
201812541.67%
2019291551.72%
2020361541.67%
2021472451.06%
All years (2014–2021)24193
BSI: bloodstream infection. VR: vancomycin-resistant.
Table 2. Characteristics of patients according to bacterial species and vancomycin susceptibility.
Table 2. Characteristics of patients according to bacterial species and vancomycin susceptibility.
VariableE. faecalis VSE
(n = 340)		E. faecium VSE
(n = 148)		E. faecium VRE
(n = 93)		p-Value
Age (years)73.7 ± 12.273.8 ± 12.271.4 ± 12.20.222
Gender (male)233 (68.5%)91 (61.5%)55 (59.1%)0.131
Charlson Comorbidity Index3.4 ± 2.53.4 ± 2.33.4 ± 2.40.998
Pitt bacteremia score2.4 ± 2.32.0 ± 2.42.7 ± 2.10.074
Previous glycopeptides exposure24 (7.1%)4 (2.7%)5 (5.4%)0.159
Previous chemotherapy17 (5.0%)24 (16.2%)15 (16.1%)<0.001
Previous abdominal surgery52 (15.3%)35 (23.6%)21 (22.6%)0.052
Chronic immunosuppressive therapy23 (6.8%)22 (14.9%)14 (15.1%)0.006
Hospital LOS before BSI13.3 ± 22.716.6 ± 17.922.3 ± 24.20.002
Ward at BSI diagnosis 0.056
Medical177 (52.1%)71 (48.0%)43 (46.2%)
Surgical89 (26.2%)46 (31.1%)18 (19.4%)
Intensive care unit74 (21.8%)31 (20.9%)32 (34.4%)
Source of infection <0.001
Primary bacteremia72 (21.2%)27 (18.2%)14 (15.1%)
Bone/skin/soft tissue17 (5.0%)4 (2.7%)5 (5.4%)
Heart/cardiovascular devices72 (21.2%)41 (27.7%)31 (33.3%)
Intra-abdominal compartment88 (25.9%)63 (42.6%)33 (35.5%)
Urinary tract91 (26.8%)13 (8.8%)10 (10.8%)
Source control 0.027
No77 (22.6%)19 (12.8%)14 (15.1%)
Yes173 (50.9%)94 (63.5%)59 (63.4%)
Not documented90 (26.5%)35 (23.6%)20 (21.5%)
Polymicrobial BSI118 (34.7%)44 (29.7%)24 (25.8%)0.209
Infective endocarditis28 (8.2%)3 (2.0%)3 (3.2%)0.014
Complicated BSI203 (59.7%)71 (48.0%)51 (54.8%)0.055
ID specialist consultation141 (41.5%)63 (42.6%)69 (74.2%)<0.001
Interval BSI-empiric therapy (days) §0.6 ± 1.30.6 ± 1.40.4 ± 1.10.554
Interval BSI-active therapy (days) ¥1.0 ± 1.81.7 ± 2.02.4 ± 2.9<0.001
Appropriate antimicrobial treatment224 (65.9%)55 (37.2%)26 (28.0%)<0.001
30-days mortality79 (23.2%)47 (31.8%)34 (36.6%)0.016
Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation or number (percentage). BSI: bloodstream infection. IDs: infectious diseases. LOS: length of hospital stay. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. §: n = 570. ¥: n = 490.
Table 3. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients and bacteria according to 30-day mortality.
Table 3. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients and bacteria according to 30-day mortality.
VariableOverall
(n = 581)		Survived
(n = 421)		Dead
(n = 160)		p-Value
Age (years)73.3 ± 12.272.5 ± 12.575.4 ± 11.10.006
Gender (male)382 (65.2%)288 (67.9%)94 (58.0%)0.024
Charlson Comorbidity Index3.4 ± 2.43.3 ± 2.43.6 ± 2.40.188
Pitt bacteremia score2.4 ± 2.32.0 ± 2.03.3 ± 2.7<0.001
Previous glycopeptides exposure34 (5.8%)26 (6.1%)8 (4.9%)0.580
Previous chemotherapy56 (9.6%)35 (8.3%)21 (13.0%)0.083
Previous abdominal surgery108 (18.4%)84 (19.8%)24 (14.8%)0.163
Previous immunosuppressive therapy59 (10.1%)41 (9.7%)18 (11.1%)0.604
Species/vancomycin sensitivity 0.016
E. faecalis/VSE340 (58.5%)261 (76.8%)79 (23.2%)
E. faecium/VSE148 (25.5%)101 (68.2%)47 (31.8%)
E. faecium/VRE93 (16.9%)59 (63.4%)34 (36.6%)
Ward at BSI diagnosis <0.001
Medical291 (50.1%)219 (75.3%)72 (24.7%)
Surgical153 (26.3%)128 (83.7%)25 (16.3%)
Intensive care unit137 (23.6%)74 (54.0%)63 (46.0%)
Source of infection 0.001
Primary bacteremia113 (19.4%)67 (59.3%)46 (40.7%)
Bone/skin/soft tissue26 (4.5%)20 (76.9%)6 (23.1%)
Heart/cardiovascular devices144 (24.8%)104 (72.2%)40 (27.8%)
Intra-abdominal184 (31.7%)133 (72.3%)51 (27.7%)
Urologic114 (19.6%)97 (85.1%)17 (14.9%)
Polymicrobial BSI187 (31.9%)133 (31.4%)54 (33.3%)0.648
Complicated BSI328 (56.0%)222 (52.4%)106 (65.4%)0.004
Interval BSI-empiric therapy (days) §0.6 ± 1.30.6 ± 1.30.6 ± 1.40.980
Interval BSI-active therapy (days) ¥1.4 ± 2.11.3 ± 2.11.4 ± 2.10.576
Appropriate antimicrobial treatment306 (52.2%)239 (56.4%)67 (41.4%)<0.001
Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation or number (percentage). BSI: bloodstream infection. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. §: n = 570. ¥: n = 490.
Table 4. Results of Cox regression of 30-day mortality on study variables.
Table 4. Results of Cox regression of 30-day mortality on study variables.
VariableHR (95% CI)p-Value
Gender (male)0.666 (0.481–0.921)0.014
Age (years)1.022 (1.007–1.038)0.005
Pitt Bacteremia Score1.269 (1.192–1.350)<0.001
Species/vancomycin sensitivity
E. faecalis/VSE (reference)1.000 (/)
E. faecium/VSE1.492 (1.022–2.180)0.038
E. faecium/VRE2.065 (1.307–3.264)0.002
Complicated BSI1.818 (1.304–2.535)<0.001
ID specialist consultation0.504 (0.352–0.719)<0.001
Appropriate antimicrobial treatment
Gender (male)		0.682 (0.488–0.955)0.026
0.666 (0.481–0.921)0.014
HR: hazard ratio. CI: confidence interval. BSI: bloodstream infection. VSE: vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus. VRE: vancomycin-resistant enterococcus. ID: Infectious diseases.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zerbato, V.; Pol, R.; Sanson, G.; Suru, D.A.; Pin, E.; Tabolli, V.; Monticelli, J.; Busetti, M.; Toc, D.A.; Crocè, L.S.; et al. Risk Factors for 30-Day Mortality in Nosocomial Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections. Antibiotics 2024, 13, 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13070601

AMA Style

Zerbato V, Pol R, Sanson G, Suru DA, Pin E, Tabolli V, Monticelli J, Busetti M, Toc DA, Crocè LS, et al. Risk Factors for 30-Day Mortality in Nosocomial Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections. Antibiotics. 2024; 13(7):601. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13070601

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zerbato, Verena, Riccardo Pol, Gianfranco Sanson, Daniel Alexandru Suru, Eugenio Pin, Vanessa Tabolli, Jacopo Monticelli, Marina Busetti, Dan Alexandru Toc, Lory Saveria Crocè, and et al. 2024. "Risk Factors for 30-Day Mortality in Nosocomial Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections" Antibiotics 13, no. 7: 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13070601

APA Style

Zerbato, V., Pol, R., Sanson, G., Suru, D. A., Pin, E., Tabolli, V., Monticelli, J., Busetti, M., Toc, D. A., Crocè, L. S., Luzzati, R., & Di Bella, S. (2024). Risk Factors for 30-Day Mortality in Nosocomial Enterococcal Bloodstream Infections. Antibiotics, 13(7), 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13070601

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