Course of Lower Respiratory Tract Infection in Young People Treated at the Military Hospital of Smolensk Garrison with Detected <i>Mycoplasma pneumoniae</i> Carrying a Macrolide-Resistant Mutation in 23S rRNA Gene

We evaluated the effect of macrolide-resistant mutations in the Mycoplasma pneumoniae 23S rRNA gene on the severity of lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompetent young adults treated at the Smolensk Military Hospital between 25 October 2017, and 17 November 2021. All analyzed cases represented a non-severe infection of the lower respiratory tract: 44 case histories with community-acquired pneumonia and 20 cases with acute bronchitis. The presence of mutations in the gene 23S rRNA of M. pneumoniae was determined with standard Sanger sequencing. The macrolide-resistant genotype was found in 4/44 (9.1%) of the samples of the patients with pneumonia and in 3/20 (15%) of the samples of the patients with acute bronchitis. The analyzed cases with identified M. pneumoniae carrying a mutation in the 23S rRNA gene did not show any differences in the clinical presentation in terms of disease severity caused by M. pneumoniae with the wild-type (WT) phenotype

Prevalence of macrolide and fluoroquinolone resistance-mediating mutations in Mycoplasma genitalium in five cities in Russia and Estonia.

Resistance in the sexually transmitted bacterium Mycoplasma genitalium to all recommended therapeutic antimicrobials have rapidly emerged. However, to date, internationally reported resistance surveillance data for M. genitalium strains circulating in Eastern Europe are entirely lacking. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of macrolide and fluoroquinolone resistance-associated mutations in M. genitalium in four cities in Russia and one in Estonia, 2013-2016.Consecutive urogenital samples found positive for M. genitalium during diagnostic testing were retrospectively analyzed for resistance-associated mutations in the 23S rRNA and parC genes using pyrosequencing and conventional Sanger sequencing, respectively.In total, 867 M. genitalium positive samples from 2013-2016 were analyzed. Macrolide resistance-associated mutations were detected in 4.6% of the samples from Russia (0.7-6.8% in different cities) and in 10% of the samples from Estonia. The mutations A2059G and A2058G were highly predominating in both Russia and Estonia, accounting together for 90.9% of the cases positive for nucleotide substitutions in the 23S rRNA gene. The rates of possible fluoroquinolone resistance-associated mutations were 6.2% in Russia (2.5-7.6% in different cities) and 5% in Estonia. The mutations S83I and S83N were the most frequent ones in Russia (24.4% each), whereas D87N highly predominated in Estonia (83.3% of all fluoroquinolone resistance-associated mutations). Approximately 1% of the samples in both countries harbored both macrolide and possible fluoroquinolone resistance-associated mutations, with A2058G and S83I being the most frequent combination (37.5%).The prevalence of macrolide and fluoroquinolone resistance-associated mutations in M. genitalium was 4.6% and 6.2%, respectively, in Russia, and 10% and 5%, respectively, in Estonia. Despite the relatively low rates of macrolide and fluoroquinolone resistance in these countries, antimicrobial resistance surveillance and testing for resistance-associated mutations in M. genitalium positive cases would be valuable

Do surgeons treat their patients like they would treat themselves?

Background There is substantial unexplained geographical and surgeon-to-surgeon variation in rates of surgery.Onewould expect surgeons to treat patients and themselves similarly based on best evidence and accounting for patient preferences. Questions/purposes (1) Are surgeons more likely to recommend surgery when choosing for a patient than for themselves? (2) Are surgeons less confident in deciding for patients than for themselves? Methods Two hundred fifty-four (32%) of 790 Science of Variation Group (SOVG) members reviewed 21 fictional upper extremity cases (eg, distal radius fracture, De Quervain tendinopathy) for which surgery is optional answering two questions: (1) What treatment would you choose/recommend: operative or nonoperative? (2) On a scale from 0 to 10, how confident are you about this decision? Confidence is the degree that one believes that his or her decision is the right one (ie, most appropriate). Participants were orthopaedic, trauma, and plastic surgeons, all with an interest in treating upper extremity conditions. Half of the participants were randomized to choose for themselves if they had this injury or illness. The other half was randomized to make treatment recommendations for a patient of their age and gender. For the choice of operative or nonoperative, the overall recommendation for treatment was expressed as a surgery score per surgeon by dividing the number of cases they would operate on by the total number of cases (n = 21), where 100% is when every surgeon recommended surgery for every case. For confidence, we calculated the mean confidence for all 21 cases per surgeon; overall score ranges from 0 to 10 with a higher score indicating more confidence in the decision for treatment. Results Surgeons were more likely to recommend surgery for a patient (44.2% ± 14.0%) than they were to choose surgery for themselves (38.5% ± 15.4%) with a mean difference of 6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1%-9.4%; p = 0.002). Surgeons were more confident in deciding for themselves than they were for a patient of similar age and gender (self: 7.9 ± 1.0, patient: 7.5 ± 1.2, mean difference: 0.35 [CI, 0.075-0.62], p = 0.012). Conclusions Surgeons are slightly more likely to recommend surgery for a patient than they are to choose surgery for themselves and they choose for themselves with a little more confidence. Different perspectives, preferences, circumstantial information, and cognitive biases might explain the observed differences. This emphasizes the importance of (1) understanding patients' preferences and their considerations for treatment; (2) being aware that surgeons and patients might weigh various factors differently; (3) giving patients more autonomy by letting them balance risks and benefits themselves (ie, shared decisionmaking); and (4) assessing how dispassionate evidencebased decision aids help inform the patient and influences their decisional conflict