Second intravenous immunoglobulin dose in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with poor prognosis (SID-GBS):a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background Treatment with one standard dose (2 g/kg) of intravenous immunoglobulin is insufficient in a proportion of patients with severe Guillain-Barre syndrome. Worldwide, around 25% of patients severely affected with the syndrome are given a second intravenous immunoglobulin dose (SID), although it has not been proven effective. We aimed to investigate whether a SID is effective in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with a predicted poor outcome. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (SID-GBS), we included patients (>= 12 years) with Guillain-Barre syndrome admitted to one of 59 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were included on the first day of standard intravenous immunoglobulin treatment (2 g/kg over 5 days). Only patients with a poor prognosis (score of >= 6) according to the modified Erasmus Guillain-Barre syndrome Outcome Score were randomly assigned, via block randomisation stratified by centre, to SID (2 g/kg over 5 days) or to placebo, 7-9 days after inclusion. Patients, outcome adjudicators, monitors, and the steering committee were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the Guillain-Barre syndrome disability score 4 weeks after inclusion. All patients in whom allocated trial medication was started were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Findings Between Feb 16, 2010, and June 5, 2018, 327 of 339 patients assessed for eligibility were included. 112 had a poor prognosis. Of those, 93 patients with a poor prognosis were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 49 (53%) received SID and 44 (47%) received placebo. The adjusted common odds ratio for improvement on the Guillain-Barre syndrome disability score at 4 weeks was 1.4 (95% CI 0.6-3.3; p=0.45). Patients given SID had more serious adverse events (35% vs 16% in the first 30 days), including thromboembolic events, than those in the placebo group. Four patients died in the intervention group (13-24 weeks after randomisation). Interpretation Our study does not provide evidence that patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with a poor prognosis benefit from a second intravenous immunoglobulin course; moreover, it entails a risk of serious adverse events. Therefore, a second intravenous immunoglobulin course should not be considered for treatment of Guillain-Barre syndrome because of a poor prognosis. The results indicate the need for treatment trials with other immune modulators in patients severely affected by Guillain-Barre syndrome. Funding Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds and Sanquin Plasma Products. Copyright (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Candida pneumonia in intensive care unit?

It has been questioned if Candida pneumonia exists as a clinical entity. Only histopathology can establish the definite diagnosis. Less invasive diagnostic strategies lack specificity and have been insufficiently validated. Scarcity of this pathomechanism and nonspecific clinical presentation make validation and the development of a clinical algorithm difficult. In the present study, we analyze whether Candida pneumonia exists in our critical care population. We used a bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimen database that we have built in a structural diagnostic approach to ventilator-associated pneumonia for more than a decade consisting of 832 samples. Microbiological data were linked to clinical information and available autopsy data. We searched for critically ill patients with respiratory failure with no other microbiological or clinical explanation than exclusive presence of Candida species in BAL fluid. Five cases could be identified with Candida as the likely cause of pneumonia

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia ventilator-associated pneumonia. A retrospective matched case-control study

BACKGROUND: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is increasingly identified in critically ill patients, but it is considered a pathogen with limited pathogenicity and it is therefore infrequently targeted. This study explores whether S. maltophilia may cause ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and whether it affects intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and 28-day mortality when compared to VAP caused by other Gram-negative bacilli. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a 19-year prospectively collected database. Stenotrophomonas maltophilia as a cause was considered in VAP-suspected cases when S. maltophilia growth of ≥10(4) cfu/ml was detected in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid analysis. Cases were matched on hospital, gender, age and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score in a 1:3 ratio with controls from the same database suffering from VAP caused by other Gram-negative bacilli. RESULTS: Eight cases met the inclusion criteria, of which three were labelled as 'probable' SM-VAP and three as 'possible' SM-VAP. These six patients constitute 1.8% of all VAPs in the studied period. No significant differences in baseline characteristics and duration of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.68), length of stay in the ICU (p = 0.55) and hospital (p = 0.84) between cases and controls were identified between cases and controls. Intensive care unit mortality odds ratio was 1.7 (p = 0.55; 95% CI 0.3-10.5) and 28-day mortality odds ratio was 1.4 (p = 0.70; 95% CI 0.2-9.1). CONCLUSIONS: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a possible, yet infrequent cause of VAP. No outcome differences were found when compared to matched VAP caused by other Gram-negative bacilli