Introduction
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a life-sustaining treatment modality utilized in patients with either hematologic malignancies or bone marrow failure. It is associated with profound immunosuppression, as it compromises both innate and acquired immunity and the integrity of the host’s barriers through chemotherapy or the development of graft versus host disease. Reference Wingard, Hsu and Hiemenz1
Due to the severe immunosuppression of the patients hospitalized in HSCT units, outbreaks can have disastrous effects on the population and function of the unit. They are associated with significant morbidity and mortality and can lead to the closure of the affected unit for weeks to months. Reference McCann, Byrne and Rovira2 The high stakes involved mean that even a pseudo-outbreak, that is, the isolation of pathogens without any clinical indication of infection, Reference Sood and Perl3 can trigger an extensive investigation to identify the source of the pathogen. Reference Nakamura, Azuma and Sato4 Thus, guidelines for infection control specifically for HSCT patients have been published. Reference Sullivan, Dykewicz and Longworth5,Reference Tomblyn, Chiller and Einsele6
Strict adherence to infection prevention practices is critical to the successful operation of an HSCT unit. Reference John and Chandy7 Beyond standard procedures like hand hygiene and nosocomial infection prevention, guidelines for HSCT units emphasize the importance of proper equipment management. They also address issues related to visitors and healthcare workers, maintenance of shared spaces, the need for careful control of room ventilation, and the management of construction, renovation, and building cleaning activities. Reference Sullivan, Dykewicz and Longworth5,Reference John and Chandy7
Considering the significant impact of these complications, a systematic review was undertaken to identify all published reports of outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks in HSCT units. The review also sought to uncover any associations between specific pathogens and sources of contamination, providing a quick guide for epidemiologists tasked with investigating these outbreaks.
Materials and methods
This systematic review was conducted in alignment with the international Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Reference Page, McKenzie and Bossuyt8 The study protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42024574800 (Figure 1) and has been published online (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=574800).
A diagram representing the assessed studies in accordance with the globally recognized Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Reference Page, McKenzie and Bossuyt8

Data sources and searches
A systematic literature review was performed utilizing the PubMed database from the time of inception until July 31st, 2024, using the search terms: outbreak[Title/Abstract] AND stem cell transplantation[Title/Abstract], outbreak[Title/Abstract] AND stem cell transplant[Title/Abstract], outbreak[Title/Abstract] AND bone marrow transplant[Title/Abstract], outbreak[Title/Abstract] AND bone marrow transplantation[Title/Abstract]. Article titles and abstracts were screened according to the selection criteria outlined in Table 1, with no publication date or language restrictions. Namely, we included case series, case–control, and cohort studies on outbreaks or pseudo-outbreaks in inpatient HSCT units. Excluded were microbiological surveillance reports without outbreaks, and hospital or community outbreaks involving HSCT patients. References from the selected articles were also reviewed to identify additional relevant publications.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria of study selection

Abbreviations: HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplant.
Study selection
Four reviewers (L.K., G.C., B.W., and V.X.) conducted the study selection process by applying the criteria summarized in Table 1 to assess each study’s eligibility for inclusion. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were subsequently evaluated for relevance and quality.
Study Design: Case–control studies, case series, and cohort studies describing outbreaks or pseudo-outbreaks in inpatient HSCT units.
Type of Participants: Adult or pediatric patients hospitalized in inpatient HSCT units.
Type of Exposure: Isolation of the pathogen involved in the outbreak or pseudo-outbreak affecting the HSCT unit from a patient. An outbreak was defined as an increase in the number of expected infections over a period of time whereas a pseudo-outbreak was defined as an increase in isolated organisms but without evidence of infection. Reference Sood and Perl9
Type of Outcome: The primary outcomes were identifying the organism(s) responsible for outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks in HSCT units and determining the sources of contamination. Secondary outcomes included assessing morbidity (number of patients affected and outbreak duration), whether specific pathogens were more commonly linked to outbreaks versus pseudo-outbreaks, exploring any associations between specific organisms and contamination sources, and evaluating antimicrobial utilization in patients involved in these incidents.
Data extraction and quality assessment
Data extracted from the full-text articles included in this review were study design, event classification (outbreak or pseudo-outbreak), pathogens involved, duration of the event, and contamination source.
Four authors (G.C., B.W., V.X., and S.A.H.) independently assessed the risk of bias using the Murad scale, Reference Murad, Sultan, Haffar and Bazerbachi10 a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale Reference Wells, Shea and O’Connell11 that utilizes six criteria to evaluate for the presence of bias. Reference Murad, Sultan, Haffar and Bazerbachi10 The specific questions used for each study’s assessment and scores for each study are detailed in supplementary Table S1. Disagreements among reviewers were resolved through consensus. A study was deemed to have a low risk of bias if it met all six criteria, a moderate risk if it met four or five criteria, and a high risk if it met three or fewer criteria.
Data synthesis and analysis
Data related to the primary and secondary endpoints were extracted and presented through narrative and analytical synthesis. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS for Windows, version 29. For continuous variables, means were reported for normally distributed data, while medians were used for non-normally distributed data. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test, with P-values calculated using Fisher’s exact test as expected cell frequencies were less than five. All reported P-values were two-sided, with significance level set at <.05.
Role of the funding source
This work received no funding from public, commercial, or not-for-profit organizations.
Results
The database search on PubMed/Medline identified 231 articles, with an additional three articles found through citation searching. After the screening process outlined in Figure 1, 39 studies describing 40 outbreaks met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. An overview of the major pathogens identified along with their respective sources of contamination and measures utilized to achieve outbreak control is presented in Table 2. The extracted data for each outbreak are presented in Table 3, and summarized in Table 4. The quality assessment of each study is detailed in Supplementary Table S1; overall, 14 studies were classified as having low risk of bias, 20 studies as having moderate risk of bias, and six studies as having high risk of bias.
Overview of the major pathogens identified in the study along with their respective sources of contamination and measures utilized to achieve outbreak control

Abbreviations: HEPA, High efficiency particulate air; EMR, electronic medical record; RSV, respiratory syncytial virus; CVC, central venous catheter.
Parameters extracted from each study, outlining the patient population, type of outbreak and duration, pathogen identified, source of contamination and methods of control. Numbers presented here include the index case as part of the affected patients

Abbreviations: HSCT, Hematopoietic stem cell transplant; NDM, New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase carbapnemase; LAF, laminar air flow; CVC, central venous catheter; WGS, whole genome sequencing.
Summary of study findings

Population characteristics
In total, 387 patients were affected by the outbreaks included in the study. Of the studies included, 25 described outbreaks occurring in adult HSCT units including 231 patients, 8 in pediatric units including 69 patients, and 6 in both adult and pediatric units, including 77 patients. Of note, a study describing an outbreak involving ten patients did not specify if the population included adult or pediatric patients. Reference Mikulska, Durando and Pia Molinari35 The median outbreak duration was 109 days (interquartile range (IQR) 58.3–177).
Pathogens and outcomes
Among the 40 identified outbreaks, 19 were viral, 17 were bacterial, and four were fungal. Regarding outcomes, 185 (47.8%) patients received antimicrobial treatment, and 91 (23.5%) patients died due to the outbreak. Viral outbreaks affected 182 patients (47%), with a median duration of 91 days (IQR 30–120), resulting in 28 deaths and a mortality rate of 15.4%. Bacterial outbreaks involved 167 patients (43.2%), with a median duration of 150 days (IQR 78–266), leading to 38 deaths and a mortality rate of 22.8%. Fungal outbreaks affected 38 patients (9.8%), with a median duration of 191 days (IQR 131–217), and resulted in 26 deaths, corresponding to a mortality rate of 65.8%.
Adenovirus was the most frequently identified pathogen, implicated in 6 outbreaks (15%), Reference Venard, Carret, Corsaro, Bordigoni and Faou25,Reference Jalal, Bibby and Tang32,Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34,Reference Swartling, Allard, Törlen, Ljungman, Mattsson and Sparrelid39,Reference Lefeuvre, Salmona and Feghoul48,Reference Fattouh, Stapleton and Eshaghi49 followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa Reference Lyytikäinen and Golovanov26,Reference Fanci, Pecile and Casalone33,Reference Chaves, Tomich and Salomão43,Reference Gbaguidi-Haore, Varin, Cholley, Thouverez, Hocquet and Bertrand50 and RSV, Reference Harrington, Hooton and Hackman15,Reference McColl, Corser, Bremner and Chopra19,Reference Kassis, Champlin and Hachem36,Reference Kelly, Metzger and Bolon40 each responsible for four outbreaks (10%). The pathogens with the highest mortality rates were Aspergillus spp. and P. aeruginosa. Of the 26 patients infected with Aspergillus spp., 24 died, yielding a mortality rate of 92.3%, while 27 out of 61 patients with a P. aeruginosa infection expired, corresponding to a mortality rate of 44.3%.
Associations between pathogens and sources of contamination were identified. Notably, 75% of P. aeruginosa outbreaks were associated with contaminated sanitary fixtures (P = .007) and water (P = .039). Similarly, all outbreaks caused by NTM were traced back to water as the contamination source (P = .009). Outbreaks involving Aspergillus spp. were exclusively associated with construction activities (P < .001), with 33% also linked to air-conditioning; however, the latter association did not reach statistical significance (P = .073). For viral infections, an index case was identified in 36.8% of outbreaks (P = .016). This included the sole influenza outbreak and 50% of adenovirus outbreaks, although the association was not statistically significant for each virus. Conversely, in 75% of outbreaks related to RSV, the source remained unidentified (P = .039).
Sources of contamination
Ten major sources of contamination were identified: inadequate disinfection protocols or deviation from protocol (18 studies), Reference Orth16–Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18,Reference Klausner, Zukerman, Limaye and Corey21,Reference Knowles, Herra and Devitt24,Reference Lyytikäinen and Golovanov26,Reference Silini, Locasciulli and Santoleri29,Reference Hirji, Saragosa and Dedier30,Reference Jalal, Bibby and Tang32–Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34,Reference Kampmeier, Pillukat, Pettke, Kossow, Idelevich and Mellmann42,Reference Nakamura, Azuma and Sato44–Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46,Reference Lefeuvre, Salmona and Feghoul48–Reference Gbaguidi-Haore, Varin, Cholley, Thouverez, Hocquet and Bertrand50 hospital environment (11 studies), Reference Nakamura, Azuma and Sato4,Reference Labarca, Leber and Kern23,Reference Knowles, Herra and Devitt24,Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28,Reference Hirji, Saragosa and Dedier30,Reference Fanci, Pecile and Casalone33,Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34,Reference Iroh Tam, Kline and Wagner38,Reference Kampmeier, Pillukat, Pettke, Kossow, Idelevich and Mellmann42,Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46,Reference Fattouh, Stapleton and Eshaghi49 hospital water supply (9 studies), Reference Lyytikäinen and Golovanov26,Reference Oren, Zuckerman, Avivi, Finkelstein, Yigla and Rowe27,Reference Kline, Cameron and Streifel31,Reference Fanci, Pecile and Casalone33,Reference Iroh Tam, Kline and Wagner38,Reference Kampmeier, Pillukat, Pettke, Kossow, Idelevich and Mellmann42,Reference Nakamura, Azuma and Sato44,Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46,Reference Gbaguidi-Haore, Varin, Cholley, Thouverez, Hocquet and Bertrand50 index cases (eight studies), Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18,Reference Kirkpatrick, Harrington and Smith20,Reference Weinstock, Eagan and Malak22,Reference Silini, Locasciulli and Santoleri29,Reference Jalal, Bibby and Tang32,Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34,Reference Branch-Elliman, Araujo-Castillo, Snyder, Sullivan, Alonso and Wright45,Reference Lefeuvre, Salmona and Feghoul48 transmission from healthcare workers (seven studies), Reference Harrington, Hooton and Hackman15,Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18–Reference Klausner, Zukerman, Limaye and Corey21,Reference Van Der Doef, Bathoorn and Van Der Linden41,Reference Ouederni, Rekaya and Bouabdallah47 sanitary fixtures (six studies), Reference Lyytikäinen and Golovanov26,Reference Fanci, Pecile and Casalone33,Reference Iroh Tam, Kline and Wagner38,Reference Kampmeier, Pillukat, Pettke, Kossow, Idelevich and Mellmann42,Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46,Reference Gbaguidi-Haore, Varin, Cholley, Thouverez, Hocquet and Bertrand50 transmission from visitors (five studies), Reference Harrington, Hooton and Hackman15,Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18,Reference Weinstock, Eagan and Malak22,Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34,Reference Swartling, Allard, Törlen, Ljungman, Mattsson and Sparrelid39 construction (three studies), Reference Rotstein, Cummings and Tidings13,Reference Barnes and Rogers14,Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 contaminated supplies/products (one study), Reference Orth16 and air conditioning (one study). Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 The contamination source was not identified in 10 of the studies reviewed. Reference Townsend, Yolken and Bishop12,Reference McColl, Corser, Bremner and Chopra19,Reference Venard, Carret, Corsaro, Bordigoni and Faou25,Reference Mikulska, Durando and Pia Molinari35–Reference Doshi, Woodwell, Kelleher, Mangan and Axelrod37,Reference Swartling, Allard, Törlen, Ljungman, Mattsson and Sparrelid39,Reference Kelly, Metzger and Bolon40,Reference Chaves, Tomich and Salomão43,Reference Ouederni, Rekaya and Bouabdallah47
Inadequate disinfection protocols or deviation from protocols was observed in 19 outbreaks. Examples of inadequate protocols included lapses in hand hygiene and surface disinfection policies, Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18,Reference Branch-Elliman, Araujo-Castillo, Snyder, Sullivan, Alonso and Wright45 use of multiuse medication vials, or a failure to routinely screen patients for a particular pathogen. Reference Silini, Locasciulli and Santoleri29 Deviations from established protocols included a unit’s failure to comply with its own Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) screening algorithm. Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46 In response, some groups modified their hand hygiene protocols, such as soap and water followed by alcohol hand rub Reference Branch-Elliman, Araujo-Castillo, Snyder, Sullivan, Alonso and Wright45 or changing hand disinfectant solution to 95% ethanol. Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34 Another group reporting an outbreak of carbapenemase-producing E. cloacae and E. coli increased ward cleaning and room decontamination after discharge, limited kitchen access to hospital staff, and introduced weekly kitchen decontamination. Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46 An Actinomycetales spp. outbreak was traced to the reinfusion of contaminated cell products from the unit’s cell manipulation lab, where control was achieved through repairing the facility’s laminar hood, removing plants from the lab, and retraining staff. Reference Hirji, Saragosa and Dedier30 In an S. maltophilia outbreak, mislabeled hand-moisturizing cream had been mistakenly used as soap for hand sanitation, and one healthcare worker was linked to all affected patients. Reference Klausner, Zukerman, Limaye and Corey21
Infection control measures in studies involving a contaminated hospital environment often focused on disposing or replacing equipment. An adenovirus outbreak in a pediatric unit was controlled by introducing single-use pacifiers and bottle nipples, improving diaper disposal, disinfecting all surfaces, and changing to a new disinfectant. Reference Mattner, Sykora, Meissner and Heim34 An NTM outbreak was traced to the development of biofilms on special handwashing machines in patient rooms and was controlled through improved maintenance and scheduled replacement of parts. Reference Nakamura, Azuma and Sato44 Another group reporting an outbreak found hospital-provided hand lotion was contaminated with P. lilacinus, Reference Orth16 which was eliminated after disposal of the lotion.
Effective management of waterborne pathogens often centered on mitigating patient exposure to contaminated water sources. In response to an L. pneumophila outbreak, one unit stopped using tap water, disconnected humidifiers, and started ciprofloxacin prophylaxis for all patients on the unit. Reference Oren, Zuckerman, Avivi, Finkelstein, Yigla and Rowe27 Following an NTM outbreak traced to a contaminated ice machine, one group permanently required patients to drink bottled water, in addition to their longstanding practice of running showers for two minutes before patient use. Reference Iroh Tam, Kline and Wagner38
Controlling outbreaks introduced to the unit by patients, visitors or staff often focused on isolation and strict adherence to infection control practices. For instance, a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak among healthcare personnel, initially transmitted by an HSCT patient, did not spread to other patients in the unit due to stringent protocols. These included immediate transfer of all patients to single rooms, restricted visitor access, limitations on patient movement, comprehensive use of personal protective equipment, and strict quarantine, testing, and retesting protocols. Reference Greiner, Götz and Malner-Wagner51 A parainfluenza outbreak was controlled by closing the affected wards and isolating infected patients. Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18 However, the outbreak recurred as a patient who survived an initial outbreak remained persistently infected, constituting the index case for a second outbreak at that same institution. Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18 Another group controlled an outbreak of astrovirus by color-coding uniforms of staff taking care of infected patients, disinfecting common rooms, and implementing contact isolation. Reference Van Der Doef, Bathoorn and Van Der Linden41 Another unit controlled an RSV outbreak by implementing cohort nursing, isolating patients, and administering ribavirin. Reference McColl, Corser, Bremner and Chopra19 Various techniques were employed for control of outbreaks related to visitors, such as discontinuing floating staff Reference Weinstock, Eagan and Malak22 and banning visitors from common areas, such as the ward’s kitchen. Reference Swartling, Allard, Törlen, Ljungman, Mattsson and Sparrelid39
Contaminated sanitary fixtures were implicated in six outbreaks. Reference Lyytikäinen and Golovanov26,Reference Fanci, Pecile and Casalone33,Reference Iroh Tam, Kline and Wagner38,Reference Kampmeier, Pillukat, Pettke, Kossow, Idelevich and Mellmann42,Reference Prescott, Billam and Yates46,Reference Gbaguidi-Haore, Varin, Cholley, Thouverez, Hocquet and Bertrand50 An outbreak of S. maltophilia was traced to a shower outlet in the room of an affected patient. Reference Kampmeier, Pillukat, Pettke, Kossow, Idelevich and Mellmann42 Shower fixtures were similarly implicated in an outbreak of P. aeruginosa, and disinfection of showerheads, pipes, and handgrips between patients, and antibiotic prophylaxis controlled that outbreak. Reference Lyytikäinen and Golovanov26 Another group reporting an outbreak of P. aeruginosa traced the source to p-traps (bend pipes that connect sinks to sewer systems) in drains in patient rooms and mandated the replacement of p-traps upon discharge when a patient had been admitted for more than one week. Reference Gbaguidi-Haore, Varin, Cholley, Thouverez, Hocquet and Bertrand50
An association with construction was noted in all three outbreaks of Aspergillus spp., Reference Rotstein, Cummings and Tidings13,Reference Barnes and Rogers14,Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 two of which involved pediatric units. Reference Barnes and Rogers14,Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 One of the outbreaks occurred while the unit was undergoing construction to add additional beds with laminar air flow filtration; the construction led to a sharp increase in Aspergillus spp. spore counts in the unit, which returned to expected levels after the conclusion of the construction. Reference Barnes and Rogers14 Another group noted an outbreak in a newly renovated ward, where cases of invasive aspergillosis were much higher than those in non-renovated wards. Reference Rotstein, Cummings and Tidings13 The third outbreak was traced to contaminated air conditioning and contaminated insulation in the unit’s nurses’ station’s wall and construction on a different building floor. Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 The team noted high Aspergillus spp. conidia counts in the part of the unit with the highest case counts, but nearly none in the part that was employing HEPA filtration systems. To control the outbreak, the team installed HEPA filters in the affected part of the unit, decontaminated the wall insulation, sealed off construction areas to ductwork, and added itraconazole to their prophylaxis regimen. Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28
Discussion
Infection control and prevention are critical in HSCT units, as HSCT recipients have a higher risk of infection-related mortality, even when compared to patients receiving conventional anticancer therapy, Reference Styczynski, Czyzewski and Wysocki52 due to their profound immunosuppression. Reference Inkster, Peters and Dancer53 This systematic review supports this heightened risk, as among the 41 outbreaks identified, the overall mortality rate exceeded 23%. For context, the overall non-relapse mortality one year after allogeneic transplantation is estimated at 9.5%. Reference Penack, Peczynski and Mohty54 This review also identified associations between pathogens and sources of contamination, which can be particularly important for epidemiologists and infection control practitioners investigating the outbreak.
Currently, no national or international medical societies provide specific guidelines on the design requirements for HSCT units. While a 2009 guidance document addresses infection prevention in HSCT recipients, Reference Tomblyn, Chiller and Einsele6 there is still a gap in clear recommendations for unit layout, water treatment, and ventilation standards. Instead, current guidance on HSCT unit construction is often extrapolated from technical and building literature. Reference Inkster, Peters and Dancer53 Development of standardized international guidelines for HSCT unit design and infection control would be beneficial in this regard. From an infection control standpoint, many of these concerns apply to other transplant units, and non-transplant wards. The complexity of defining such standards must not be overlooked, and should go beyond the commonly recommended HEPA filtration to include clear guidance on water safety standards and design, given the high incidence of waterborne pathogen outbreaks in these units. Reference Inkster, Peters and Dancer53
The highest mortality rates were noted in Aspergillus spp. and P. aeruginosa outbreaks, with rates surpassing 90% and 40%, respectively. Therefore, the sources and modes of transmission of these pathogens are of particular importance, as they are some of the most common pathogens isolated, and mitigating their spread can have a significant impact.
Air handling is a critical aspect of infection prevention in HSCT units. This is highlighted through outbreaks related to Aspergillus spp., which were associated with construction and air conditioning, Reference Rotstein, Cummings and Tidings13,Reference Barnes and Rogers14,Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 while two studies measured and identified higher counts of Aspergillus spp. conidia in the air of the unit during the outbreaks. Reference Barnes and Rogers14,Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 Measures of control of these outbreaks included sealing off the ducts at the construction site and employing HEPA filters Reference Hahn, Cummings, Michalek, Lipman, Segal and McCarthy28 or laminar air flow filtration systems. Reference Barnes and Rogers14 These outbreaks occurred over 20 years ago; since then, the use of HEPA filters, positive pressure rooms, and close monitoring of construction within the hospital environment has become common practice. Reference Tomblyn, Chiller and Einsele6 Indeed, the IDSA guidelines on preventing infectious complications among HSCT recipients provide a strong recommendation for using HEPA filters in facilities that treat HSCT recipients, Reference Tomblyn, Chiller and Einsele6 but this is not done in all centers. Reference Inkster, Peters and Dancer53 They also highlight the importance of air filtration during construction or renovation, during which filtration efficiency should be monitored to determine when filters need to be replaced. Reference Tomblyn, Chiller and Einsele6 HEPA filters are also available as portable units, which have demonstrated efficacy in reducing the incidence of invasive aspergillosis in the wards where they are installed. Reference Abdul Salam, Karlin, Ling and Yang55 Evaluating the specific role of portable HEPA filters in HSCT units may be beneficial, particularly in settings where fixed air processing systems are challenging to implement.
Water-borne pathogen related outbreaks were associated with contamination of water and sanitary fixtures. P. aeruginosa is a common contaminant of hospital tap water, found in the tap water of 82% of hospitals surveyed. Reference Baghal Asghari, Nikaeen and Mirhendi56 In hematology units, P. aeruginosa has been isolated in over 47% of U-bend (similar in design and function to a p-trap) samples from patient room sinks. Reference Varin, Valot and Cholley57 Pathogens such as P. aeruginosa, L. pneumophila and NTM have also been isolated from hospital shower head aerosols. Reference Cordes, Wiesenthal and Gorman58–Reference Hozalski, LaPara and Zhao60
Water management in healthcare facilities is inherently complex, and HSCT units may act as sentinels for systemic vulnerabilities due to the heightened susceptibility of their patients and increased screening. Targeted interventions to mitigate waterborne infections may be particularly impactful in these units, given their heightened risk. Examples include flushing stagnant water before the use of the facilities by patients, especially if the equipment has not been used recently, Reference Hozalski, LaPara and Zhao60 and reducing droplet generation through using splash reducing handwash basins. Reference Aranega-Bou, Cornbill, Verlander and Moore61 Effective interventions to reduce the incidence of P. aeruginosa infections in HSCT units have included the installation of rimless toilets and disinfection of siphons. Reference Kossow, Kampmeier and Willems62
Viral outbreaks appear to pose a particular problem associated with transmission from index cases, healthcare providers, and visitors. However, they were also the only type of pathogen associated with having an unidentified source. This reflects the high transmission potential of viruses, especially in HSCT recipients. Reference Abbas, Raybould, Sastry and de la Cruz63 For instance, in one parainfluenza outbreak, a patient infected during the initial event continued shedding the virus for five weeks, ultimately becoming the source of a second outbreak in the same unit. Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18 Measures to control viral outbreaks included cohort nursing, Reference McColl, Corser, Bremner and Chopra19,Reference Van Der Doef, Bathoorn and Van Der Linden41 relocating infected patients into a separate isolation ward, Reference Zambon, Bull, Sadler, Goldman and Ward18 or preventing visitors from using shared facilities in the unit. Reference Swartling, Allard, Törlen, Ljungman, Mattsson and Sparrelid39
Only one outbreak due to SARS‑CoV‑2 was identified, likely due to strict adherence to rigorous infection control measures. Reference Greiner, Götz and Malner-Wagner51 Additionally, our study’s focus on outbreaks specific to HSCT units, rather than hospital-wide events, may have contributed to identifying fewer observed SARS‑CoV‑2-related incidents. We also observed that no outbreaks were associated with MRSA, foodborne pathogens or plants. This likely reflects adherence to guidelines for infection prevention in HSCT recipients, which emphasize hand hygiene, food safety practices, and prohibit plants in HSCT units. 64
This study has several limitations. As only outbreaks in inpatient HSCT units were included, no data were collected on outbreaks in oncologic wards or outpatient HSCT units, which may have provided relevant insights. Also, studies of hospital-wide outbreaks that also included HSCT units were excluded, which could have provided insight on how pathogens that propagate across facilities invade the sequestered space of an HSCT unit. Additionally, the heterogeneity of reported outcomes prevented the conduction of a meta-analysis. Furthermore, the exclusive focus on HSCT units did not permit us to evaluate whether similar infection prevention standards could be effectively applied to other high-risk hospital wards.
In conclusion, our study highlights several associations between pathogens involved in HSCT unit outbreaks and their respective sources. Notably, no outbreaks related to MRSA or foodborne pathogens were identified, likely reflecting the effectiveness of existing guidelines for the prevention of these infections. Establishing standardized guidelines for unit construction – particularly for ventilation and water safety – could further reduce the risk of airborne and waterborne pathogen transmission and enhance infection prevention in these high-risk settings.
Supplementary material
The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2025.66
Data availability statement
All the relevant data obtained and analyzed for the purposes of this study are presented in the current manuscript.
Financial support
None reported.
Competing interests
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.




