99 research outputs found

    Imipenem resistance of Pseudomonas in pneumonia: a systematic literature review

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pneumonia, and particularly nosocomial (NP) and ventilator-associated pneumonias (VAP), results in high morbidity and costs. NPs in particular are likely to be caused by <it>Pseudomonas aeruginosa </it>(PA), ~20% of which in observational studies are resistant to imipenem. We sought to identify the burden of PA imipenem resistance in pneumonia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) of imipenem treatment for pneumonia published in English between 1993 and 2008. We extracted study, population and treatment characteristics, and proportions caused by PA. Endpoints of interest were: PA resistance to initial antimicrobial treatment, clinical success, microbiologic eradication and on-treatment emergence of resistance of PA.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 46 studies identified, 20 (N = 4,310) included patients with pneumonia (imipenem 1,667, PA 251; comparator 1,661, PA 270). Seven were double blind, and 7 included US data. Comparator arms included a β-lactam (17, [penicillin 6, carbapenem 4, cephalosporin 7, monobactam 1]), aminoglycoside 2, vancomycin 1, and a fluoroquinolone 5; 5 employed double coverage. Thirteen focused exclusively on pneumonia and 7 included pneumonia and other diagnoses. Initial resistance was present in 14.6% (range 4.2-24.0%) of PA isolates in imipenem and 2.5% (range 0.0-7.4%) in comparator groups. Pooled clinical success rates for PA were 45.2% (range 0.0-72.0%) for imipenem and 74.9% (range 0.0-100.0%) for comparator regimens. Microbiologic eradication was achieved in 47.6% (range 0.0%-100.0%) of isolates in the imipenem and 52.8% (range 0.0%-100.0%) in the comparator groups. Resistance emerged in 38.7% (range 5.6-77.8%) PA isolates in imipenem and 21.9% (range 4.8-56.5%) in comparator groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In the 15 years of RCTs of imipenem for pneumonia, PA imipenem resistance rates are high, and PA clinical success and microbiologic eradication rates are directionally lower for imipenem than for comparators. Conversely, initial and treatment-emergent resistance is more likely with the imipenem than the comparator regimens.</p

    Impact of species and antibiotic therapy of enterococcal peritonitis on 30-day mortality in critical care - An analysis of the OUTCOMEREA database

    Full text link
    Introduction: Enterococcus species are associated with an increased morbidity in intraabdominal infections (IAI). However, their impact on mortality remains uncertain. Moreover, the influence on outcome of the appropriate or inappropriate status of initial antimicrobial therapy (IAT) is subjected to debate, except in septic shock. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether an IAT that did not cover Enterococcus spp. was associated with 30-day mortality in ICU patients presenting with IAI growing with Enterococcus spp. Material and methods: Retrospective analysis of French database OutcomeRea from 1997 to 2016. We included all patients with IAI with a peritoneal sample growing with Enterococcus. Primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Results: Of the 1017 patients with IAI, 76 (8%) patients were included. Thirty-day mortality in patients with inadequate IAT against Enterococcus was higher (7/18 (39%) vs 10/58 (17%), p = 0.05); however, the incidence of postoperative complications was similar. Presence of Enterococcus spp. other than E. faecalis alone was associated with a significantly higher mortality, even greater when IAT was inadequate. Main risk factors for having an Enterococcus other than E. faecalis alone were as follows: SAPS score on day 0, ICU-acquired IAI, and antimicrobial therapy within 3 months prior to IAI especially with third-generation cephalosporins. Univariate analysis found a higher hazard ratio of death with an Enterococcus other than E. faecalis alone that had an inadequate IAT (HR = 4.4 [1.3-15.3], p = 0.019) versus an adequate IAT (HR = 3.1 [1.0-10.0], p = 0.053). However, after adjusting for confounders (i.e., SAPS II and septic shock at IAI diagnosis, ICU-acquired peritonitis, and adequacy of IAT for other germs), the impact of the adequacy of IAT was no longer significant in multivariate analysis. Septic shock at diagnosis and ICU-acquired IAI were prognostic factors. Conclusion: An IAT which does not cover Enterococcus is associated with an increased 30-day mortality in ICU patients presenting with an IAI growing with Enterococcus, especially when it is not an E. faecalis alone. It seems reasonable to use an IAT active against Enterococcus in severe postoperative ICU-acquired IAI, especially when a third-generation cephalosporin has been used within 3 months. © 2019 The Author(s)

    Using research to prepare for outbreaks of severe acute respiratory infection

    Get PDF

    Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

    Erratum to: Assessment of the Validity and Reproducibility of a Novel Standardized Test Meal for the Study of Postprandial Triacylglycerol Concentrations (Lipids, (2017), 52, (675-686), 10.1007/s11745-017-4275-9)

    No full text
    The article “Assessment of the Validity and Reproducibility of a Novel Standardized Test Meal for the Study of Postprandial Triacylglycerol Concentrations”, written by Nikolaos Tentolouris, Panagiotis T. Kanellos, Evangelia Siami, Elpida Athanasopoulou, Nikolaos Chaviaras, Genovefa Kolovou, Petros P. Sfikakis, Nikolaos Katsilambros, was originally published electronically on the publisher’s internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on 26 June 2017 without open access. The original article was corrected. With the author(s) decision to opt for Open Choice the copyright of the article changed on 31 August 2017 to © The Author(s) 2017 and the article is forthwith distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. © AOCS 2017
    corecore