22 research outputs found

    Revolutionizing Clinical Microbiology Laboratory Organization in Hospitals with In Situ Point-of-Care

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Clinical microbiology may direct decisions regarding hospitalization, isolation and anti-infective therapy, but it is not effective at the time of early care. Point-of-care (POC) tests have been developed for this purpose. METHODS AND FINDINGS: One pilot POC-lab was located close to the core laboratory and emergency ward to test the proof of concept. A second POC-lab was located inside the emergency ward of a distant hospital without a microbiology laboratory. Twenty-three molecular and immuno-detection tests, which were technically undemanding, were progressively implemented, with results obtained in less than four hours. From 2008 to 2010, 51,179 tests yielded 6,244 diagnoses. The second POC-lab detected contagious pathogens in 982 patients who benefited from targeted isolation measures, including those undertaken during the influenza outbreak. POC tests prevented unnecessary treatment of patients with non-streptococcal tonsillitis (n = 1,844) and pregnant women negative for Streptococcus agalactiae carriage (n = 763). The cerebrospinal fluid culture remained sterile in 50% of the 49 patients with bacterial meningitis, therefore antibiotic treatment was guided by the molecular tests performed in the POC-labs. With regard to enterovirus meningitis, the mean length-of-stay of infected patients over 15 years old significantly decreased from 2008 to 2010 compared with 2005 when the POC was not in place (1.43±1.09 versus 2.91±2.31 days; p = 0.0009). Altogether, patients who received POC tests were immediately discharged nearly thrice as often as patients who underwent a conventional diagnostic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The on-site POC-lab met physicians' needs and influenced the management of 8% of the patients that presented to emergency wards. This strategy might represent a major evolution of decision-making regarding the management of infectious diseases and patient care

    Intrapartum GBS screening and antibiotic prophylaxis: a European consensus conference

    Full text link
    Group B streptococcus (GBS) remains worldwide a leading cause of severe neonatal disease. Since the end of the 1990s, various strategies for prevention of the early onset neonatal disease have been implemented and have evolved. When a universal antenatal GBS screening-based strategy is used to identify women who are given an intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis, a substantial reduction of incidence up to 80% has been reported in the USA as in other countries including European countries. However recommendations are still a matter of debate due to challenges and controversies on how best to identify candidates for prophylaxis and to drawbacks of intrapartum administration of antibiotics. In Europe, some countries recommend either antenatal GBS screening or risk-based strategies, or any combination, and others do not have national or any other kind of guidelines for prevention of GBS perinatal disease. Furthermore, accurate population-based data of incidence of GBS neonatal disease are not available in some countries and hamper good effectiveness evaluation of prevention strategies. To facilitate a consensus towards European guidelines for the management of pregnant women in labor and during pregnancy for the prevention of GBS perinatal disease, a conference was organized in 2013 with a group of experts in neonatology, gynecology- obstetrics and clinical microbiology coming from European representative countries. The group reviewed available data, identified areas where results were suboptimal, where revised procedures and new technologies could improve current practices for prevention of perinatal GBS disease. The key decision issued after the conference is to recommend intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis based on a universal intrapartum GBS screening strategy using a rapid real time testing

    Suction drainage fluid culture during septic orthopaedic surgery, a retrospective study

    No full text
    International audienceWe evaluated the usefulness of suction drainage fluid culture after septic orthopaedic surgery to predict early surgical reintervention. We conducted a retrospective observational study, at the Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint-Joseph between 2014 and 2019. All the patients undergoing septic orthopaedic surgery, with perioperative samples and a postoperative suction drainage device, were enrolled. We compared the group with positive or negative postoperative drainage fluid cultures, respectively, on surgical outcome. We included 246 patients. The drainage fluid culture was positive in 42.3% of the cases. Early surgical reintervention concerned 14.6% of the cases (n = 36), including 61.1% of patients with positive drainage fluid culture (n = 22/36). The risk factors associated with positive drainage fluid cultures were the debridement of the infected site (without orthopaedic device removal), an infection located at the spine, perioperative positive cultures to Staphylococcus aureus. The complete change of the orthopaedic device, and coagulase-negative staphylococci on the preoperative samples, was associated with negative drainage fluid cultures. Positive drainage fluid culture was predictive of early surgical reintervention, and coagulase-negative staphylococci in the preoperative samples and knee infection were predictive of surgical success. Postoperative drainage fluid cultures were predictive of early surgical reintervention. Randomized multicentric studies should be further conducted

    A first-in-human Phase I dose-escalation trial of the novel therapeutic peptide, ALM201, demonstrates a favourable safety profile in unselected patients with ovarian cancer and other advanced solid tumours

    Get PDF
    Background: We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of a novel anti-angiogenic peptide. Methods: We used an open-label, multicentre, dose-escalation Phase I trial design in patients with solid tumours. ALM201 was administered subcutaneously once daily for 5 days every week in unselected patients with solid tumours. Results: Twenty (8 male, 12 female) patients with various solid tumours were treated (18 evaluable for toxicity) over eight planned dose levels (10–300 mg). ALM201 was well-tolerated at all dose levels without CTCAE grade 4 toxicities. Adverse events were predominantly grades 1–2, most commonly, localised injection-site reactions (44.4%), vomiting (11%), fatigue (16.7%), arthralgia (5.6%) and headache (11%). Thrombosis occurred in two patients at the 100 mg and 10 mg dose levels. The MTD was not reached, and a recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) based on feasibility was declared. Plasma exposure increased with dose (less than dose-proportional at the two highest dose levels). No peptide accumulation was evident. The median treatment duration was 11.1 (range 3–18) weeks. Four of 18 evaluable patients (22%) had stable disease. Conclusions: Doses up to 300 mg of ALM201 subcutaneously are feasible and well-tolerated. Further investigation of this agent in selected tumour types/settings would benefit from patient-selection biomarkers

    Intrapartum GBS screening and antibiotic prophylaxis: A European consensus conference

    No full text
    Group B streptococcus (GBS) remains worldwide a leading cause of severe neonatal disease. Since the end of the 1990s, various strategies for prevention of the early onset neonatal disease have been implemented and have evolved. When a universal antenatal GBS screening-based strategy is used to identify women who are given an intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis, a substantial reduction of incidence up to 80% has been reported in the USA as in other countries including European countries. However recommendations are still a matter of debate due to challenges and controversies on how best to identify candidates for prophylaxis and to drawbacks of intrapartum administration of antibiotics. In Europe, some countries recommend either antenatal GBS screening or risk-based strategies, or any combination, and others do not have national or any other kind of guidelines for prevention of GBS perinatal disease. Furthermore, accurate population-based data of incidence of GBS neonatal disease are not available in some countries and hamper good effectiveness evaluation of prevention strategies. To facilitate a consensus towards European guidelines for the management of pregnant women in labor and during pregnancy for the prevention of GBS perinatal disease, a conference was organized in 2013 with a group of experts in neonatology, gynecology-obstetrics and clinical microbiology coming from European representative countries. The group reviewed available data, identified areas where results were suboptimal, where revised procedures and new technologies could improve current practices for prevention of perinatal GBS disease. The key decision issued after the conference is to recommend intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis based on a universal intrapartum GBS screening strategy using a rapid real time testing
    corecore