Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background Risk factors for bloodstream infection in patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) remain unclear. The purpose of this systematic review was to study the risk factors for BSI in patients admitted to ICUs for COVID-19. Methods A systematic search was performed on Pu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jun Wang, Ting Jiang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-01-01
Series:BMC Infectious Diseases
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-10420-1
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1841559844029464576
author Jun Wang
Ting Jiang
author_facet Jun Wang
Ting Jiang
author_sort Jun Wang
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Risk factors for bloodstream infection in patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) remain unclear. The purpose of this systematic review was to study the risk factors for BSI in patients admitted to ICUs for COVID-19. Methods A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to July 2024. Data were reported as combined odds ratio (OR) for categorical variables and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables. Results 6914 studies were retrieved, of which 55 were included in the meta-analysis. Men (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.10–1.50, P = 0.006), high SAPS II score (WMD = 6.43, 95% CI: 0.23–12.63, P = 0.042), diabetes (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.04–1.73, P = 0.022), tracheal intubation (OR = 8.68, 95% CI: 4.68–16.08, P < 0.001), mechanical ventilation (OR = 22.00, 95% CI: 3.77-128.328, P < 0.001), ECMO (OR = 2.70, 95% CI: 1.17–6.26, P = 0.020), central venous cannulation (OR = 9.33, 95% CI: 3.06–28.43, P < 0.001), prolonged ICU stay (WMD = 10.37, 95% CI: 9.29–11.44, P < 0.001), methylprednisolone use (OR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.24–4.04, P = 0.008), and the combination of methylprednisolone and Tocilizumab (OR = 4.54, 95% CI: 1.09–18.88, P = 0.037) were risk factors for ICU-BSI in COVID-19 patients. Conclusion We identified 10 risk factors for ICU-BSI in COVID-19 patients. In future studies, these factors can be combined to establish a more comprehensive and accurate prediction model for ICU-BSI in COVID-19 patients. Targeted measures can be taken earlier to control BSI.
format Article
id doaj-art-d2011413b2884eecb11e9de008c810f6
institution Kabale University
issn 1471-2334
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Infectious Diseases
spelling doaj-art-d2011413b2884eecb11e9de008c810f62025-01-05T12:09:48ZengBMCBMC Infectious Diseases1471-23342025-01-0125111710.1186/s12879-024-10420-1Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysisJun Wang0Ting Jiang1Laboratory Department, First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineIntensive Care Unit, First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineAbstract Background Risk factors for bloodstream infection in patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) remain unclear. The purpose of this systematic review was to study the risk factors for BSI in patients admitted to ICUs for COVID-19. Methods A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to July 2024. Data were reported as combined odds ratio (OR) for categorical variables and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables. Results 6914 studies were retrieved, of which 55 were included in the meta-analysis. Men (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.10–1.50, P = 0.006), high SAPS II score (WMD = 6.43, 95% CI: 0.23–12.63, P = 0.042), diabetes (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.04–1.73, P = 0.022), tracheal intubation (OR = 8.68, 95% CI: 4.68–16.08, P < 0.001), mechanical ventilation (OR = 22.00, 95% CI: 3.77-128.328, P < 0.001), ECMO (OR = 2.70, 95% CI: 1.17–6.26, P = 0.020), central venous cannulation (OR = 9.33, 95% CI: 3.06–28.43, P < 0.001), prolonged ICU stay (WMD = 10.37, 95% CI: 9.29–11.44, P < 0.001), methylprednisolone use (OR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.24–4.04, P = 0.008), and the combination of methylprednisolone and Tocilizumab (OR = 4.54, 95% CI: 1.09–18.88, P = 0.037) were risk factors for ICU-BSI in COVID-19 patients. Conclusion We identified 10 risk factors for ICU-BSI in COVID-19 patients. In future studies, these factors can be combined to establish a more comprehensive and accurate prediction model for ICU-BSI in COVID-19 patients. Targeted measures can be taken earlier to control BSI.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-10420-1Bloodstream infectionCOVID-19ICUMeta-analysis
spellingShingle Jun Wang
Ting Jiang
Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BMC Infectious Diseases
Bloodstream infection
COVID-19
ICU
Meta-analysis
title Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Risk factors for bloodstream infection in COVID-19 patients in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort risk factors for bloodstream infection in covid 19 patients in intensive care units a systematic review and meta analysis
topic Bloodstream infection
COVID-19
ICU
Meta-analysis
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-10420-1
work_keys_str_mv AT junwang riskfactorsforbloodstreaminfectionincovid19patientsinintensivecareunitsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tingjiang riskfactorsforbloodstreaminfectionincovid19patientsinintensivecareunitsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis