Human Arboviral Infections in Italy: Past, Current, and Future Challenges

: Arboviruses represent a public health concern in many European countries, including Italy, mostly because they can infect humans, causing potentially severe emergent or re-emergent diseases, with epidemic outbreaks and the introduction of endemic circulation of new species previously confined to tropical and sub-tropical regions. In this review, we summarize the Italian epidemiology of arboviral infection over the past 10 years, describing both endemic and imported arboviral infections, vector distribution, and the influence of climate change on vector ecology. Strengthening surveillance systems at a national and international level is highly recommended to be prepared to face potential threats due to arbovirus diffusion

Clinical characteristics and outcome of ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections. A retrospective, observational, 2-center clinical study

Background Recently, Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) with resistance to ceftazidime/avibactam (CZA-R) has been described, including KPC variants that restore carbapenem susceptibility. The aim of the study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of infections caused by CZA-R KPC-Kp. Methods From 2019 to 2021, a retrospective 2-center study including patients with infections due to CZA-R KPC-Kp hospitalized at 2 academic hospitals in Rome was conducted. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected. Principal outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Statistical analyses were performed with Stata-IC17 software. Results Overall, 59 patients were included (mean age, 64.4 & PLUSMN; 14.6 years; mean Charlson comorbidity index score, 4.5 & PLUSMN; 2.7). Thirty-four patients (57.6%) had infections caused by CZA-R and meropenem (MEM)-susceptible strains. A previous CZA therapy was observed in 40 patients (67.8%), mostly in patients with MEM-susceptible KPC variant (79.4% vs 52%, P = .026). Primary bacteremia was observed in 28.8%, followed by urinary tract infections and pneumonia. At infection onset, septic shock was present in 15 subjects (25.4%). After adjustment for confounders, only the presence of septic shock was independently associated with mortality (P = .006). Conclusions Infections due to CZA-R KPC-Kp often occur in patients who had previously received CZA, especially in the presence of strains susceptible to MEM. Nevertheless, one-third of patients had never received CZA before KPC-Kp CZA-R. Since the major driver for mortality was infection severity, understanding the optimal therapy in patients with KPC-Kp CZA-R infections is of crucial importance.Clinical characteristics and outcomes of infections caused by ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant (CZA-R) Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae were analyzed. Ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant and meropenem-susceptible KPC variants accounted for more than half of patients. Infections due to CZA-R KPC-Kp often occur in patients who had previously received CZA, especially in the presence of strains susceptible to meropenem. Nevertheless, one-third of patients had never received CZA before isolation of CZA strains. Infection severity was the only independent predictor of 30-day mortality

Resistance to Ceftazidime/Avibactam in Klebsiella pneumoniae KPC-Producing Isolates: A Real-Life Observational Study

Background: Ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) resistance amongst Enterobacterales is worryingly increasing worldwide. Objectives: The aim of this study was to collect and describe real-life data on CAZ-AVI-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP) isolates in our University Hospital, with the ultimate goal of evaluating possible risk factors related to the acquisition of resistance. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study, including unique Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP) isolates resistant to CAZ-AVI (CAZ-AVI-R) and producing only KPC, collected from July 2019 to August 2021 at Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. The pathogen's list was obtained from the microbiology laboratory; clinical charts of the corresponding patients were reviewed to collect demographic and clinical data. Subjects treated as outpatients or hospitalized for <48 h were excluded. Patients were then divided into two groups: S group, if they had a prior isolate of CAZ-AVI-susceptible KP-KPC, and R group, if the first documented isolate of KP-KPC was resistant to CAZ-AVI. Results: Forty-six unique isolates corresponding to 46 patients were included in the study. The majority of patients (60.9%) were hospitalized in an intensive care unit, 32.6% in internal medicine wards and 6.5% in surgical wards. A total of 15 (32.6%) isolates were collected from rectal swabs, representing a colonization. Amongst clinically relevant infections, pneumonia and urinary tract infections were the most commonly found (5/46, 10.9% each). Half of the patients received CAZ-AVI prior to isolation of the KP-KPC CAZ-AVI-R (23/46). This percentage was significantly higher in patients in the S group compared to patients in the R group (69.3% S group vs. 25% R group, p = 0.003). No differences between the two groups were documented in the use of renal replacement therapy or in the infection site. The clinically relevant CAZ-AVI-R KP infections (22/46, 47.8%) were all treated with a combination therapy, 65% including colistin and 55% including CAZ-AVI, with an overall clinical success of 38.1%. Conclusions: Prior use of CAZ-AVI was associated with the emergence of drug resistance

Highly Sensitive HBsAg, Anti-HBc and Anti HBsAg Titres in Early Diagnosis of HBV Reactivation in Anti-HBc-Positive Onco-Haematological Patients

The role of novel HBV markers in predicting Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R) in HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive oncohaematological patients was examined. One hundred and seven HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive oncohaematological patients, receiving anti-HBV prophylaxis for >18 months, were included. At baseline, all patients had undetectable HBV DNA, and 67.3% were anti-HBs positive. HBV-R occurred in 17 (15.9%) patients: 6 during and 11 after the prophylaxis period. At HBV-R, the median (IQR) HBV-DNA was 44 (27-40509) IU/mL, and the alanine aminotransferase upper limit of normal (ULN) was 44% (median (IQR): 81 (49-541) U/L). An anti-HBc > 3 cut-off index (COI) plus anti-HBs persistently/declining to <50 mIU/mL was predictive for HBV-R (OR (95% CI): 9.1 (2.7-30.2); 63% of patients with vs. 15% without this combination experienced HBV-R (p < 0.001)). The detection of highly sensitive (HS) HBsAg and/or HBV-DNA confirmed at >2 time points, also predicts HBV-R (OR (95% CI): 13.8 (3.6-52.6); 50% of positive vs. 7% of negative patients to these markers experienced HBV-R (p = 0.001)). HS-HBs and anti-HBc titration proved to be useful early markers of HBV-R. The use of these markers demonstrated that HBV-R frequently occurs in oncohaematological patients with signs of resolved HBV infection, raising issues of proper HBV-R monitoring

Validation of the T-Lymphocyte Subset Index (TLSI) as a Score to Predict Mortality in Unvaccinated Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

Lymphopenia has been consistently reported as associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Several studies have described a profound decline in all T-cell subtypes in hospitalized patients with severe and critical COVID-19. The aim of this study was to assess the role of T-lymphocyte subset absolute counts measured at ward admission in predicting 30-day mortality in COVID-19 hospitalized patients, validating a new prognostic score, the T-Lymphocyte Subset Index (TLSI, range 0–2), based on the number of T-cell subset (CD4+ and CD8+) absolute counts that are below prespecified cutoffs. These cutoff values derive from a previously published work of our research group at Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy: CD3+CD4+ < 369 cells/µL, CD3+CD8+ < 194 cells/µL. In the present single-center retrospective study, T-cell subsets were assessed on admission to the infectious diseases ward. Statistical analysis was performed using JASP (Version 0.16.2. JASP Team, 2022, The Amsterdam, The Netherlands) and Prism8 (version 8.2.1. GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Clinical and laboratory parameters of 296 adult patients hospitalized because of COVID-19 were analyzed. The overall mortality rate was 22.3% (66/296). Survivors (S) had a statistically significant lower TLSI score compared to non-survivors (NS) (p < 0.001). Patients with increasing TLSI scores had proportionally higher rates of 30-day mortality (p < 0.0001). In the multivariable logistic analysis, the TLSI was an independent predictor of in-hospital 30-day mortality (OR: 1.893, p = 0.003). Survival analysis showed that patients with a TLSI > 0 had an increased risk of death compared to patients with a TLSI = 0 (hazard ratio: 2.83, p < 0.0001). The TLSI was confirmed as an early and independent predictor of COVID-19 in-hospital 30-day mortalit

Evidence supporting recommendations from international guidelines on treatment, diagnosis, and prevention of HAP and VAP in adults

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are intended to support clinical decisions and should be based on high-quality evidence. The objective of the study was to evaluate the quality of evidence supporting the recommendations issued in CPGs for therapy, diagnosis, and prevention of hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP). CPGs released by international scientific societies after year 2000, using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, were analyzed. Number and strength of recommendations and quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, and very low) were extracted and indexed in the aforementioned sections. High-quality evidence was based on randomized control trials (RCT) without important limitations and exceptionally on rigorous observational studies. Eighty recommendations were assessed, with 7 (8.7%), 24 (30.0%), 29 (36.3%), and 20 (25.0%) being supported by high, moderate, low, and very low-quality evidence, respectively. Highest evidence degree was reported for 26 prevention recommendations, with 7 (26.9%) supported by high-quality evidence and no recommendation based on very low-quality evidence. In contrast, among 9 recommendations for diagnosis and 45 for therapy, none was supported by high-quality evidence, in spite of being recommended as strong in 33.3% and 46.7%, respectively. Among HAP/VAP diagnosis recommendations, the majority of evidence was rated as low or very low-quality (55.6% and 22.2%, respectively) whereas among HAP/VAP therapy recommendations, 4/5 were rated as low and very low-quality (40% each). In conclusion, among HAP/VAP international guidelines, most recommendations, particularly in therapy, remain supported by observational studies, case reports, and expert opinion. Well-designed RCTs are urgently needed.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Levels of evidence supporting clinical practice guidelines on invasive aspergillosis

Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is a severe life-threatening infection with challenges in therapy. The aim was to evaluate the level of evidence (LOE) supporting recommendations in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) of IA and changes over time. Search on CPG on IA released between 2000 and 2019 was done. Last versions were evaluated and compared with previous versions. Recommendations were classified by LOE as A (multiple randomized controlled trial (RCT) or meta-analysis), B (data from a single RCT or observational studies), or C (observational studies with limitations, case series, or expert opinion). Diagnosis recommendations were excluded. Five CPG from three groups of scientific societies were identified: the 2016 Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society (IDSA/ATS), 2017 European Society of Clinical Microbiology Infectious Diseases/European Confederation of Medical Mycology/European Respiratory Society (ESCMID/ECMM/ERS), 2018 Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) CPGs, and their previous versions (2008 IDSA/ATS and 2011 GEMICOMED/SEIMC). ECMID/ECMM/ERS have not published any previous version. From 511 recommendations analyzed, 80 were classified as LOE A (15.7%), 223 LOE B (43.6%), and 208 LOE C (40.7%). Among 238 strong recommendations, only 57 (24.0%) were supported by LOE A. When comparing recent CPGs with previous versions, the proportion of recommendations supported by LOE A did not significantly increase over time (IDSA/ATS: 13.3% [2016] vs. 14.8% [2008], p = 0.798; and SEIMC: 22.6% [2018] vs. 19% [2011], p = 0.568). In conclusion, IA is a condition with an urgent unmet clinical need for more high-quality randomized trials

Evaluation of the quality of evidence supporting guideline recommendations for the nutritional management of critically ill adults

Aims: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of evidence supporting the 2019 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and 2016 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) recommendations for medical nutrition therapy in critically ill patients. Secondary objectives are to assess the differences between 2019 ESPEN and 2016 ASPEN recommendations and to inform relevant stakeholders of areas requiring improvement in the research. Methods: The 2019 ESPEN and 2016 ASPEN guidelines were identified and downloaded from the official websites. The level of evidence and strength of recommendations from the guidelines were standardised to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Level of evidence was classified as high-quality (randomised controlled trials (RCTs) without important limitations), moderate-quality (downgraded RCTs or upgraded observational studies) or low-quality (observational studies without specific strengths or important limitations, case series, case reports). In addition, good practice points (GPP; recommendations based on the clinical experience of the guideline development group) were considered. Strength of recommendation was reported as strong or weak. Results: From 152 total recommendations, only five (3.3%) were supported by high-quality evidence, with 14 being strong recommendations. A total of 79 (52.0%) recommendations were GPPs. Overall, the proportion of recommendations supported by high-quality (7% [ESPEN] vs. 1.1% [ASPEN], p < 0.05) and moderate-quality evidence (33.3% [ESPEN] vs. 8.4% [ASPEN], p < 0.01) was significantly higher in ESPEN guidelines. On the other hand, ASPEN guidelines reported a greater proportion of recommendations supported by GPPs (58.9% [ASPEN] vs. 40.4% [ESPEN], p = 0.03). In enteral and parenteral nutrition, the proportion of recommendations supported by moderate-quality evidence (50% [ESPEN] vs. 15.8% [ASPEN], p < 0.01) was significantly higher in ESPEN guidelines. Conclusion: Published guideline recommendations for the nutritional management of critically ill adults remain largely supported by expert opinion and only a minority by high-quality evidence. An urgent unmet clinical need for high-quality clinical trials is warranted

Quality of evidence supporting surviving sepsis campaign recommendations

Introduction: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines, released in 2017, are a combination of expert opinion and evidence-based medicine, adopted by many institutions as a standard of practice. The aim was to analyse the quality of evidence supporting recommendations on the management of sepsis. Methods: The strength and quality of evidence (high, moderate, low-very low and best practice statements) of each recommendation were extracted. Randomised controlled trials were required to qualify as high-quality evidence. Results: A total of 96 recommendations were formulated, and 87 were included. Among thirty-one (43%) strong recommendations, only 15.2% were supported by high-quality evidence. Overall, thirty-seven (42.5%) recommendations were based on low-quality evidence, followed by 28 (32.2%) based on moderate-quality, 15 (17.2%) were best practice statements and only seven (8.0%) were supported by high-quality evidence. Randomised controlled trials supported 21.4%, 9.5% and 8.6% recommendations on mechanical ventilation, resuscitation, and management/adjuvant therapy, respectively. In contrast, none high-quality evidence recommendation supported antimicrobial/source control (82.4% were low-very low evidence or best practice statements), and nutrition. Conclusions: In the SSC guidelines most recommendations were informed by indirect evidence and non-systematic observations. While awaiting trials results, Delphi-like approaches or multi-criteria decision analyses should guide recommendations