Toward Defining Complicated Coagulase-Negative Staphylococcal Bacteremia

TO THE EDITOR -We read with great interest the recent study by Papadimitriou-Olivgeris et al. in which they tried to validate our criteria for complicated coagulase-negative staphylococcal (CoNS) bacteremia. 1,2They concluded that our criteria failed to identify patients at higher mortality risk.While we appreciate their work, we believe certain methodological aspects merit further consideration.First, the validation was conducted retrospectively merging two separate cohorts, one of them including patients with suspected infective endocarditis (IE), which, as the authors acknowledge, may have led to an overrepresentation of suspected IE cases, potentially limiting the generalizability of their findings.The authors state that only "true CoNS bacteremia" cases were included, but the criteria used to distinguish true infections from contamination are not specified.This raises the possibility that a higher proportion of contaminants may have been included, given the notably low mortality (9%) compared to our study (17%) and previous reports.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2025-06-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaf307
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Streptococcal Infections and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Toward Defining Complicated Coagulase-Negative Staphylococcal Bacteremia

Luis Eduardo López-Cortés, Benedetta Varisco, Jesús Rodríguez‐Baño
1 citations
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Streptococcal Infections and Treatments
1.88
article

Toward Defining Complicated Coagulase-Negative Staphylococcal Bacteremia

Luis Eduardo López-Cortés, Benedetta Varisco, Jesús Rodríguez‐Baño
article en
1 citations

Abstract

TO THE EDITOR -We read with great interest the recent study by Papadimitriou-Olivgeris et al. in which they tried to validate our criteria for complicated coagulase-negative staphylococcal (CoNS) bacteremia. 1,2They concluded that our criteria failed to identify patients at higher mortality risk.While we appreciate their work, we believe certain methodological aspects merit further consideration.First, the validation was conducted retrospectively merging two separate cohorts, one of them including patients with suspected infective endocarditis (IE), which, as the authors acknowledge, may have led to an overrepresentation of suspected IE cases, potentially limiting the generalizability of their findings.The authors state that only "true CoNS bacteremia" cases were included, but the criteria used to distinguish true infections from contamination are not specified.This raises the possibility that a higher proportion of contaminants may have been included, given the notably low mortality (9%) compared to our study (17%) and previous reports.

Clinical Infectious DiseasesVol. 81(5)
Humanitas University (IT), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES), Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena (ES), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red (ES), Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (ES), IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (IT)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Streptococcal Infections and Treatments
1.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.