Incidence and risk factors for acquired colonization and infection due to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli a retrospective analysis in three ICUs with low multidrug resistance rate

International audienceThe purpose of this study is to assess risk factors for the acquisition of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli (ESBL-GNB) colonization and infection (AI) in ICUs with low ESBL-GNB prevalence rate. We conducted a retrospective observational study in three ICUs in Bretagne, France. All patients admitted from January 2016 to September 2017 with a length of stay of 2 days or more were included. Universal screening for ESBL-GNB colonization was performed in all participating ICUs. Of the 3250 included patients, 131 (4.0%) were colonized at admission, 59 acquired colonization while hospitalized (1.9%; 95% CI [1.5-2.5%]), and 15 (0.5%; 95% CI [0.3-0.8%]) acquired ESBL-GNB infections. In the case of infection, the specificity and the negative predictive values of preexistent colonization for the ESBL-GNB etiology were 93.2% [91.5-95.1%] and 95.2% [93.5-97.1%], respectively. Colonization was the main risk factor for ESBL-GNB AI (OR = 9.61; 95% CI [2.86-32.29]; p < 0.001). Antimicrobial susceptibility of non-ESBL-GNB isolates responsible for AI was similar for any non-carbapenem β-lactam (95%) and imipenem (94%). ESBL-GNB AIs were rare in ICUs with low ESBL-GNB prevalence rate. Prior colonization was the main risk factor for subsequent infection. Empirical carbapenem therapy could be avoided in non ESBL-GNB colonized patients with suspected AI

Amélioration d'un modèle d'estimation de pose avec des données non labelisées

International audienc

Long-term outcome of patients with non-operated prosthetic valve infective endocarditis is relapse the main issue?

International audienceIn non-operated prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE), long term outcome is largely unknown. We report the follow-up of 129 non-operated patients with PVE alive at discharge. At one year, the mortality rate was 24%, relapses and reinfection were rare (5% each). Enterococcal PVE was associated with a higher risk of relapse

Contribution of voriconazole N-oxide plasma concentration measurements to voriconazole therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with invasive fungal infection

International audienceBACKGROUND: Voriconazole (VRC), a widely used triazole antifungal, exhibits significant inter- and intra-individual pharmacokinetic variability. The main metabolite voriconazole N-oxide (NOX) can provide information on the patient’s drug metabolism capacity. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to implement routine measurement of NOX concentrations and to describe the metabolic ratio (MR), and the contribution of the MR to VRC therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) by proposing a suggested dosage-adjustment algorithm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients treated with VRC were prospectively included in the study, and VRC and NOX levels were assayed by LC-MS/MS. A mixed logistic model on repeated measures was implemented to analyze risk factors for the patient’s concentration to be outside the therapeutic range. RESULTS: Based on 225 measurements, the median and interquartile range were 2.4 μg/mL (1.2; 4.2), 2.1 μg/mL (1.5; 3.0), and 1.0 (0.6; 1.9) for VRC, NOX, and the MR, respectively. VRC C(min) &lt; 2 μg/mL were associated with a higher MR during the previous visit. MR values &gt; 1.15 and &lt; 0.48 were determined to be the best predictors for having a VRC C(min) lower than 2 μg/mL and above 5.5 μg/mL, respectively, at the next visit. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of NOX resulted useful for TDM of patients treated with VRC. The MR using NOX informed interpretation and clinical decision-making and is very interesting for complex patients. VRC phenotyping based on the MR is now performed routinely in our institution. A dosing algorithm has been suggested from these results

Is Rifampin Use Associated With Better Outcome in Staphylococcal Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis? A Multicenter Retrospective Study

International audienceBackground: International guidelines recommend rifampin-based combinations for staphylococcal prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). However, no robust clinical data supports this recommendation, and rifampin tolerability is an issue. We aimed to evaluate the impact of rifampin for the treatment of staphylococcal PVE.Methods: An observational retrospective cohort study of all adults with staphylococcal PVE (modified Duke criteria) was conducted in three referral centers for endocarditis, during years 2000-2018. Primary outcome measurement was one-year mortality.Results: We enrolled 180 patients with PVE due to Staphylococcus aureus (n=114, 63.3%), or coagulase-negative staphylococci (n=66, 36.7%), on bioprosthesis (n=111, 61.7%), mechanical valve (n=67, 37.2%), or both (n=2). There were 132 males (73.3%), and mean age was 70.4±12.4 years. Valvular surgery was performed in 51/180 (28.3%) cases. Despite all isolates were susceptible to rifampin, only 101 (56.1%) were treated with rifampin, for a median duration of 33.0 days, while 79 (43.9%) received no rifampin. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. One-year mortality was, respectively, 37.6% (38/101), and 31.6% (25/79), in patients treated with, or without, rifampin (P=0.62). Relapse rates were 5.9% (6/101), and 8.9% (7/79), P=0.65. Patients treated with rifampin had longer hospital length-of-stay: 42.3±18.6 vs. 31.3±14.0 days (P<0.0001). On multivariate analysis, only cerebral emboli (OR 2.95, CI95% 1.30-6.70, P=0.009), definite endocarditis (OR 7.15, 1.47-34.77, P=0.018), and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (OR 6.04, 1.34-27.26, P=0.019), were associated with one-year mortality.Conclusions: A large proportion (43.9%) of staphylococcal PVE received no rifampin. One-year survival and relapse rates were similar in patients treated with or without rifampin

Non-influenza respiratory viruses in adult patients admitted with influenza-like illness a 3-year prospective multicenter study

International audiencePurpose - To describe the burden, and characteristics, of influenza-like illness (ILI) associated with non-influenza respiratory viruses (NIRV). Methods - We performed a prospective, multicenter, observational study of adults admitted with ILI during three influenza seasons (2012-2015). Patients were screened for picornavirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), coronavirus, human metapneumovirus, adenovirus, bocavirus, parainfluenza virus, and influenza, by PCR on nasopharyngeal samples. We excluded patients coinfected with NIRV and influenza.Results - Among 1421 patients enrolled, influenza virus was detected in 535 (38%), and NIRV in 215 (15%), mostly picornavirus (n = 61), RSV (n = 53), coronavirus 229E (n = 48), and human metapneumovirus (n = 40). In-hospital mortality was 5% (NIRV), 4% (influenza), and 5% (no respiratory virus). As compared to influenza, NIRV were associated with age (median, 73 years vs. 68, P = 0.026), chronic respiratory diseases (53% vs. 45%, P = 0.034), cancer (14% vs. 9%, P = 0.029), and immunosuppressive drugs (21% vs. 14%, P = 0.028), and inversely associated with diabetes (18% vs. 25%, P = 0.038). On multivariable analysis, only chronic respiratory diseases (OR 1.5 [1.1-2.0], P = 0.008), and diabetes (OR 0.5 [0.4-0.8], P = 0.01) were associated with NIRV detection.Conclusions - NIRV are common in adults admitted with ILI during influenza seasons. Outcomes are similar in patients with NIRV, influenza, or no respiratory virus

Cardiac Adverse Events and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Post Hoc Safety Analysis of the Randomized DisCoVeRy Trial

International audienceBackground We aimed to evaluate the cardiac adverse events (AEs) in hospitalized patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving remdesivir plus standard of care (SoC) compared to SoC alone (control), as an association was noted in some cohort studies and disproportionality analyses of safety databases. Methods This post-hoc safety analysis is based on data from the multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled DisCoVeRy trial in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (NCT04315948). Any first AE occurring between randomization and day 29 in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population randomized to either remdesivir or control group was considered. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for event rates. Results Cardiac AEs were reported in 46 (11.2%) of 410 and 48 (11.3%) of 423 patients in the mITT population (n = 833) enrolled in the remdesivir and control groups, respectively. The difference between both groups was not significant (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.5, p = 0.98), even when evaluating serious and non-serious cardiac AEs separately. The majority of reports in both groups were of arrhythmic nature (remdesivir, 84.8%; control, 83.3%) and were associated with a favorable outcome. There was no significant difference between remdesivir and control groups in the occurrence of different cardiac AE subclasses, including arrhythmic events (HR 1.1, 95% CI: 0.7-1.7, p = 0.68). Conclusions Remdesivir treatment was not associated with an increased risk of cardiac AEs, whether serious or not, and regardless of AE severity, compared to control, in patients hospitalized with moderate or severe COVID-19. This is consistent with the results of other randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses

Cardiac Adverse Events and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Post Hoc Safety Analysis of the Randomized DisCoVeRy Trial

International audienceBackground We aimed to evaluate the cardiac adverse events (AEs) in hospitalized patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving remdesivir plus standard of care (SoC) compared to SoC alone (control), as an association was noted in some cohort studies and disproportionality analyses of safety databases. Methods This post-hoc safety analysis is based on data from the multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled DisCoVeRy trial in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (NCT04315948). Any first AE occurring between randomization and day 29 in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population randomized to either remdesivir or control group was considered. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for event rates. Results Cardiac AEs were reported in 46 (11.2%) of 410 and 48 (11.3%) of 423 patients in the mITT population (n = 833) enrolled in the remdesivir and control groups, respectively. The difference between both groups was not significant (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.5, p = 0.98), even when evaluating serious and non-serious cardiac AEs separately. The majority of reports in both groups were of arrhythmic nature (remdesivir, 84.8%; control, 83.3%) and were associated with a favorable outcome. There was no significant difference between remdesivir and control groups in the occurrence of different cardiac AE subclasses, including arrhythmic events (HR 1.1, 95% CI: 0.7-1.7, p = 0.68). Conclusions Remdesivir treatment was not associated with an increased risk of cardiac AEs, whether serious or not, and regardless of AE severity, compared to control, in patients hospitalized with moderate or severe COVID-19. This is consistent with the results of other randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses

Cardiac Adverse Events and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Post Hoc Safety Analysis of the Randomized DisCoVeRy Trial

International audienceBackground We aimed to evaluate the cardiac adverse events (AEs) in hospitalized patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving remdesivir plus standard of care (SoC) compared to SoC alone (control), as an association was noted in some cohort studies and disproportionality analyses of safety databases. Methods This post-hoc safety analysis is based on data from the multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled DisCoVeRy trial in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (NCT04315948). Any first AE occurring between randomization and day 29 in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population randomized to either remdesivir or control group was considered. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for event rates. Results Cardiac AEs were reported in 46 (11.2%) of 410 and 48 (11.3%) of 423 patients in the mITT population (n = 833) enrolled in the remdesivir and control groups, respectively. The difference between both groups was not significant (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.5, p = 0.98), even when evaluating serious and non-serious cardiac AEs separately. The majority of reports in both groups were of arrhythmic nature (remdesivir, 84.8%; control, 83.3%) and were associated with a favorable outcome. There was no significant difference between remdesivir and control groups in the occurrence of different cardiac AE subclasses, including arrhythmic events (HR 1.1, 95% CI: 0.7-1.7, p = 0.68). Conclusions Remdesivir treatment was not associated with an increased risk of cardiac AEs, whether serious or not, and regardless of AE severity, compared to control, in patients hospitalized with moderate or severe COVID-19. This is consistent with the results of other randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses

Remdesivir plus standard of care versus standard of care alone for the treatment of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (DisCoVeRy): a phase 3, randomised, controlled, open-label trial

International audienc