Is a single positive blood culture for Enterococcus species representative of infection or contamination?

Abstract Data on the clinical outcomes of patients with a single compared with multiple positive blood cultures for Enterococcus species is limited. We undertook a retrospective cohort study in adults with at least one positive blood culture for Enterococcus species in a single institution. Clinical outcomes included death and elimination of infection. We included 471 positive blood cultures from 206 enterococcal positive blood culture episodes in 189 patients. Multiple positive blood cultures for Enterococcus species occurred in 110/206 (53.4 %) episodes; 31.6 % of patients had diabetes mellitus; 42.9 % of patients had solid or hematologic malignancy; 26.5 % of patients were solid organ transplant recipients; hospital-acquired and healthcare-associated acquisition represented 55.3 % and 33.0 % of episodes, respectively. Thirtyfive patients died and 110 episodes of enterococcal bloodstream infection were successfully treated. In the multivariable analysis, multiple positive blood cultures were not statistically significantly associated with an increased likelihood of in-hospital death [odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.42-2.40] or elimination (OR 1.41, 95 % CI 0.76-2.64) compared with single positive blood cultures. Hematologic malignancy and diabetes mellitus were independently associated with in-hospital death (OR 2.83, 95 % Cl 1.02-7.82; OR 2.79, 95 % Cl 1.16-6.70, respectively). Infectious disease consultation was associated with a greater likelihood of elimination (OR 2.50, 95 % Cl 1.32-4.72). The clinical outcomes of patients with single versus multiple positive blood cultures with Enterococcus species were similar in our institution. Further studies should examine efficient methods to detect contamination versus true infection

Implication of backward contact tracing in the presence of overdispersed transmission in COVID-19 outbreaks

Introduction: Contact tracing has the potential to control outbreaks without the need for stringent physical distancing policies, e.g. civil lockdowns. Unlike forward contact tracing, backward contact tracing identifies the source of newly detected cases. This approach is particularly valuable when there is high individual-level variation in the number of secondary transmissions (overdispersion). Methods: By using a simple branching process model, we explored the potential of combining backward contact tracing with more conventional forward contact tracing for control of COVID-19. We estimated the typical size of clusters that can be reached by backward tracing and simulated the incremental effectiveness of combining backward tracing with conventional forward tracing. Results: Across ranges of parameter values consistent with dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, backward tracing is expected to identify a primary case generating 3-10 times more infections than a randomly chosen case, typically increasing the proportion of subsequent cases averted by a factor of 2-3. The estimated number of cases averted by backward tracing became greater with a higher degree of overdispersion. Conclusion: Backward contact tracing can be an effective tool for outbreak control, especially in the presence of overdispersion as is observed with SARS-CoV-2

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

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

Is a single positive blood culture for Enterococcus species representative of infection or contamination?

Abstract Data on the clinical outcomes of patients with a single compared with multiple positive blood cultures for Enterococcus species is limited. We undertook a retrospective cohort study in adults with at least one positive blood culture for Enterococcus species in a single institution. Clinical outcomes included death and elimination of infection. We included 471 positive blood cultures from 206 enterococcal positive blood culture episodes in 189 patients. Multiple positive blood cultures for Enterococcus species occurred in 110/206 (53.4 %) episodes; 31.6 % of patients had diabetes mellitus; 42.9 % of patients had solid or hematologic malignancy; 26.5 % of patients were solid organ transplant recipients; hospital-acquired and healthcare-associated acquisition represented 55.3 % and 33.0 % of episodes, respectively. Thirtyfive patients died and 110 episodes of enterococcal bloodstream infection were successfully treated. In the multivariable analysis, multiple positive blood cultures were not statistically significantly associated with an increased likelihood of in-hospital death [odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.42-2.40] or elimination (OR 1.41, 95 % CI 0.76-2.64) compared with single positive blood cultures. Hematologic malignancy and diabetes mellitus were independently associated with in-hospital death (OR 2.83, 95 % Cl 1.02-7.82; OR 2.79, 95 % Cl 1.16-6.70, respectively). Infectious disease consultation was associated with a greater likelihood of elimination (OR 2.50, 95 % Cl 1.32-4.72). The clinical outcomes of patients with single versus multiple positive blood cultures with Enterococcus species were similar in our institution. Further studies should examine efficient methods to detect contamination versus true infection

Erratum: Search for anomalous tt production in the highly-boosted all-hadronic final state

The uncertainties on the mistagged NTMJ background include the statistical uncertainty on the sample after loose selection, to which the mistag probability is applied; the statistical uncertainty on the mistag probability itself, ranging from 2to ≈10% at 3TeV/c2; and the systematic uncertainty on the mistag probability application, as described in section 3.3, which is in the range of 1 to 5% depending on the tt mass. The total background uncertainty is ≈5% for the low-mass region, dominated by the systematic uncertainty, and ≈100% for the high-mass region, dominated by statistical uncertainty associated with the sample after loose selection