Outbreak of Mycobacterium chelonae Infection Associated with Tattoo Ink

Background In January 2012, on the basis of an initial report from a dermatologist, we began to investigate an outbreak of tattoo-associated Mycobacterium chelonae skin and softtissue infections in Rochester, New York. The main goals were to identify the extent, cause, and form of transmission of the outbreak and to prevent further cases of infection. Methods We analyzed data from structured interviews with the patients, histopathological testing of skin-biopsy specimens, acid-fast bacilli smears, and microbial cultures and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. We also performed DNA sequencing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), cultures of the ink and ingredients used in the preparation and packaging of the ink, assessment of source water and faucets at tattoo parlors, and investigation of the ink manufacturer. Results Between October and December 2011, a persistent, raised, erythematous rash in the tattoo area developed in 19 persons (13 men and 6 women) within 3 weeks after they received a tattoo from a single artist who used premixed gray ink; the highest occurrence of tattooing and rash onset was in November (accounting for 15 and 12 patients, respectively). The average age of the patients was 35 years (range, 18 to 48). Skin-biopsy specimens, obtained from 17 patients, showed abnormalities in all 17, with M. chelonae isolated from 14 and confirmed by means of DNA sequencing. PFGE analysis showed indistinguishable patterns in 11 clinical isolates and one of three unopened bottles of premixed ink. Eighteen of the 19 patients were treated with appropriate antibiotics, and their condition improved. Conclusions The premixed ink was the common source of infection in this outbreak. These findings led to a recall by the manufacturer

Impact of changes at the Candida albicans cell surface upon immunogenicity and colonisation in the gastrointestinal tract

Acknowledgements This work was supported by a programme grant from the UK Medical Research Council (MR/M026663/1; MR/M026663/2) and by the Medical Research Council Centre for Medical Mycology (MR/N006364/1; MR/N006364/2). NARG acknowledges Wellcome support for a Senior Investigator (101873/Z/13/Z), Collaborative (200208/A/15/Z; 215599/Z/19/Z) and Strategic Awards (097377/Z11/Z). LR, SHD and AWW received core funding support from the Scottish Government’s Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services (RESAS) division. MGN was supported by an ERC Advanced Grant (833247) and a Spinoza Grant of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Peripheral blood mononuclear cells from neovascular age-related macular degeneration patients produce higher levels of chemokines CCL2 (MCP-1) and CXCL8 (IL-8)

Flow cytometry analysis of PBMCs. PBMCs were first divided into CD11b+CD3−, CD11b−CD3+ and CD11b−CD3− cells (A) and the average percentage of all samples (n = 55) was analysed before and after stimulation with PMA/ionomycin (B). Figure S2. Percentage of total IL-4 and IL-10 producing PBMCs and percentage of CD11b−CD3+ IL-17A and IFNγ producing PBMCs (almost all of IL-17A and IFNγ producing PBMCs were CD11b−CD3+) from controls and nAMD patients under non-stimulated culture conditions and after stimulation with PMA/ionomycin. Controls n = 27, nAMD = 28; mean + SEM are shown. (PDF 413 kb

Towards standardized measurement of adverse events in spine surgery: conceptual model and pilot evaluation

BACKGROUND: Independent of efficacy, information on safety of surgical procedures is essential for informed choices. We seek to develop standardized methodology for describing the safety of spinal operations and apply these methods to study lumbar surgery. We present a conceptual model for evaluating the safety of spine surgery and describe development of tools to measure principal components of this model: (1) specifying outcome by explicit criteria for adverse event definition, mode of ascertainment, cause, severity, or preventability, and (2) quantitatively measuring predictors such as patient factors, comorbidity, severity of degenerative spine disease, and invasiveness of spine surgery. METHODS: We created operational definitions for 176 adverse occurrences and established multiple mechanisms for reporting them. We developed new methods to quantify the severity of adverse occurrences, degeneration of lumbar spine, and invasiveness of spinal procedures. Using kappa statistics and intra-class correlation coefficients, we assessed agreement for the following: four reviewers independently coding etiology, preventability, and severity for 141 adverse occurrences, two observers coding lumbar spine degenerative changes in 10 selected cases, and two researchers coding invasiveness of surgery for 50 initial cases. RESULTS: During the first six months of prospective surveillance, rigorous daily medical record reviews identified 92.6% of the adverse occurrences we recorded, and voluntary reports by providers identified 38.5% (surgeons reported 18.3%, inpatient rounding team reported 23.1%, and conferences discussed 6.1%). Trained observers had fair agreement in classifying etiology of 141 adverse occurrences into 18 categories (kappa = 0.35), but agreement was substantial (kappa ≥ 0.61) for 4 specific categories: technical error, failure in communication, systems failure, and no error. Preventability assessment had moderate agreement (mean weighted kappa = 0.44). Adverse occurrence severity rating had fair agreement (mean weighted kappa = 0.33) when using a scale based on the JCAHO Sentinel Event Policy, but agreement was substantial for severity ratings on a new 11-point numerical severity scale (ICC = 0.74). There was excellent inter-rater agreement for a lumbar degenerative disease severity score (ICC = 0.98) and an index of surgery invasiveness (ICC = 0.99). CONCLUSION: Composite measures of disease severity and surgery invasiveness may allow development of risk-adjusted predictive models for adverse events in spine surgery. Standard measures of adverse events and risk adjustment may also facilitate post-marketing surveillance of spinal devices, effectiveness research, and quality improvement