53 research outputs found

    Antimicrobial de-escalation in the critically ill patient and assessment of clinical cure: the DIANA study

    Get PDF
    Purpose: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. Methods: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. Results: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60\u20131.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14\u20131.64). Conclusion: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely

    Is prolonged infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem in critically ill patients associated with improved pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic and patient outcomes? An observation from the Defining Antibiotic Levels in Intensive care unit patients (DALI) cohort

    Get PDF
    Objectives:We utilized the database of the Defining Antibiotic Levels in Intensive care unit patients (DALI) study to statistically compare the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic and clinical outcomes between prolonged-infusion and intermittent-bolus dosing of piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem in critically ill patients using inclusion criteria similar to those used in previous prospective studies.Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicentre pharmacokinetic point-prevalence study (DALI), which recruited a large cohort of critically ill patients from 68 ICUs across 10 countries.Results: Of the 211 patients receiving piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem in the DALI study, 182 met inclusion criteria. Overall, 89.0% (162/182) of patients achieved the most conservative target of 50% fT(> MIC) (time over which unbound or free drug concentration remains above the MIC). Decreasing creatinine clearance and the use of prolonged infusion significantly increased the PTA for most pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets. In the subgroup of patients who had respiratory infection, patients receiving beta-lactams via prolonged infusion demonstrated significantly better 30 day survival when compared with intermittent-bolus patients [86.2% (25/29) versus 56.7% (17/30); P=0.012]. Additionally, in patients with a SOFA score of >= 9, administration by prolonged infusion compared with intermittent-bolus dosing demonstrated significantly better clinical cure [73.3% (11/15) versus 35.0% (7/20); P=0.035] and survival rates [73.3% (11/15) versus 25.0% (5/20); P=0.025].Conclusions: Analysis of this large dataset has provided additional data on the niche benefits of administration of piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem by prolonged infusion in critically ill patients, particularly for patients with respiratory infections

    Grüber's ligament as a useful landmark for the abducens nerve in the transnasal approach

    No full text

    Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Second-Line Treatment Options: Is the Difference Only in Cost?

    No full text
    WOS:000605102700001PubMed: 33400209Introduction Although pancreatic cancer ranks seventh in cancer-related deaths, it is an extremely fatal disease, and more than 330,000 people die from this disease worldwide. Although there are many first-line treatment studies in the literature, there are almost no prospective studies regarding second-line therapy. Therefore, there is no standard approach in the second-line treatment of pancreatic cancer. We decided to conduct this study to investigate second-line treatments with problems such as cost, treatment efficacy, and toxicity. Methods Patients older than 18 years old who applied to Ege University Hospital medical oncology department with a diagnosis of metastatic pancreatic cancer, who received first-line chemotherapy due to their illness, and who had progressed afterwards were included in the study. The files of the patients who applied between 2013 and 2017 were examined. Results Our study's primary endpoint was progression-free survival, and it was found that the median progression-free survival was 3.2 months in the Xelox patients, 3.7 months in the gemcitabine-nab paclitaxel patients, and 3.5 months in the other regimens. When the secondary endpoint was evaluated, overall survival, the median overall survival was 5.9 months in the Xelox patients, 5.3 months in the gemcitabine-nab paclitaxel patients, and 4.8 months in the other regimens. Conclusion As a result, second-line treatments were compared, and no statistically significant difference was found between them. For this reason, the side effects of previously used drugs and the side effects of new drugs to be used, as well as their costs, should be evaluated when choosing a treatment
    corecore