Histoplasma capsulatum prosthetic joint infection

Immunocompromised patients are at risk of opportunistic infections. This is a 67-year-old woman with systemic sclerosis and knee osteoarthritis who underwent left total knee arthroplasty in 2009. In 2018 she underwent surgery for presumed aseptic loosening. Inflammation and purulent fluid were found; implant was removed and replaced with a static spacer. Three weeks later, H. capsulatum was isolated. She was successfully treated with itraconazole for 18 months; cultures on revision spacer replacement surgery were negative

Cephalotin Versus Dicloxacillin for the Treatment of Methicillin-Susceptible <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> Bacteraemia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: First-line treatments for methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia are nafcillin, oxacillin, or cefazolin. Regional shortages of these antibiotics force clinicians to use other options like dicloxacillin and cephalotin. This study aims to describe and compare the safety and efficacy of cephalotin and dicloxacillin for the treatment of MSSA bacteraemia. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in a referral centre in Mexico City. We identified MSSA isolates in blood cultures from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2022. Patients ≥ 18 years of age, with a first episode of MSSA bacteraemia, who received cephalotin or dicloxacillin as the definitive antibiotic treatment, were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality. Results: We included 202 patients, of which 48% (97/202) received cephalotin as the definitive therapy and 52% (105/202) received dicloxacillin. In-hospital all-cause mortality was 20.7% (42/202). There were no differences in all-cause in-hospital mortality between patients receiving cephalotin or dicloxacillin (20% vs. 21%, p = 0.43), nor in 30-day all-cause mortality (14% vs. 18%, p = 0.57) or 90-day all-cause mortality (24% vs. 22%, p = 0.82). No severe adverse reactions were associated with either antibiotic. Conclusions: Cephalotin and dicloxacillin were equally effective for treating MSSA bacteraemia, and both showed an adequate safety profile

Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns and Antibiotic Use during Hospital Conversion in the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective: To describe empirical antimicrobial prescription on admission in patients with severe COVID-19, the prevalence of Hospital-Acquired Infections, and the susceptibility patterns of the causing organisms. Methods: In this prospective cohort study in a tertiary care center in Mexico City, we included consecutive patients admitted with severe COVID-19 between March 20th and June 10th and evaluated empirical antimicrobial prescription and the occurrence of HAI. Results: 794 patients with severe COVID-19 were admitted during the study period. Empiric antibiotic treatment was started in 92% of patients (731/794); the most frequent regimes were amoxicillin-clavulanate plus atypical coverage in 341 (46.6%) and ceftriaxone plus atypical coverage in 213 (29.1%). We identified 110 HAI episodes in 74/656 patients (11.3%). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was the most frequent HAI, in 56/110 (50.9%), followed by bloodstream infections (BSI), in 32/110 (29.1%). The most frequent cause of VAP were Enterobacteriaceae in 48/69 (69.6%), followed by non-fermenter gram-negative bacilli in 18/69 (26.1%). The most frequent cause of BSI was coagulase negative staphylococci, in 14/35 (40.0%), followed by Enterobacter complex in 7/35 (20%). Death occurred in 30/74 (40.5%) patients with one or more HAI episodes and in 193/584 (33.0%) patients without any HAI episode (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusion: A high frequency of empiric antibiotic treatment in patients admitted with COVID-19 was seen. VAP and BSI were the most frequent hospital-acquired infections, due to Enterobacteriaceae and coagulase negative staphylococci, respectively

Epidemiological Profile and Social Welfare Index as Factors Associated with COVID-19 Hospitalization and Severity in Mexico City: A Retrospective Analysis

Epidemiological data indicate that Mexico holds the 19th place in cumulative cases (5506.53 per 100,000 inhabitants) of COVID-19 and the 5th place in cumulative deaths (256.14 per 100,000 inhabitants) globally and holds the 4th and 3rd place in cumulative cases and deaths in the Americas region, respectively, with Mexico City being the most affected area. Several modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors have been linked to a poor clinical outcome in COVID-19 infection; however, whether socioeconomic and welfare factors are associated with clinical outcome has been scanty addressed. This study tried to investigate the association of Social Welfare Index (SWI) with hospitalization and severity due to COVID-19. A retrospective analysis was conducted at the Centro M&eacute;dico Nacional &ldquo;20 de Noviembre&rdquo;&mdash;ISSSTE, based in Mexico City, Mexico. A total of 3963 patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, registered from March to July 2020, were included, retrieved information from the Virology Analysis and Reference Unit Database. Demographic, symptoms and clinical data were analyzed, as well as the SWI, a multidimensional parameter based on living and household conditions. An adjusted binary logistic regression model was performed in order to compare the outcomes of hospitalization, mechanical ventilation requirement (MVR) and mortality between SWI categories: Very high (VHi), high (Hi), medium (M) and low (L). The main findings show that lower SWI were independently associated with higher probability for hospital entry: VHi vs. Hi vs. M vs. L-SWI (0 vs. +0.24 [OR = 1.24, CI95% 1.01&ndash;1.53] vs. +0.90 [OR = 1.90, CI95% 1.56&ndash;2.32] vs. 0.73 [OR = 1.73, CI95% 1.36&ndash;2.19], respectively); Mechanical Ventilation Requirement: VHi vs. M vs. L-SWI (0 vs. +0.45 [OR = 1.45, CI95% 1.11&ndash;1.87] vs. +0.35 [OR = 1.35, CI95% 1.00&ndash;1.82]) and mortality: VHi vs. Hi vs. M (0 vs. +0.54 [OR = 1.54, CI95% 1.22&ndash;1.94] vs. +0.41 [OR = 1.41, CI95% 1.13&ndash;1.76]). We concluded that SWI was independently associated with the poor clinical outcomes in COVID-19, beyond demographic, epidemiological and clinical characteristics

Efficacy of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised adults with COVID-19: a double-bind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Functional impairment of interferon, a natural antiviral component of the immune system, is associated with the pathogenesis and severity of COVID-19. We aimed to compare the efficacy of interferon beta-1a in combination with remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at 63 hospitals across five countries (Japan, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA). Eligible patients were hospitalised adults (aged ≥18 years) with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by a positive RT-PCR test, and who met one of the following criteria suggestive of lower respiratory tract infection: the presence of radiographic infiltrates on imaging, a peripheral oxygen saturation on room air of 94% or less, or requiring supplemental oxygen. Patients were excluded if they had either an alanine aminotransferase or an aspartate aminotransferase concentration more than five times the upper limit of normal; had impaired renal function; were allergic to the study product; were pregnant or breast feeding; were already on mechanical ventilation; or were anticipating discharge from the hospital or transfer to another hospital within 72 h of enrolment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous remdesivir as a 200 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by a 100 mg maintenance dose administered daily for up to 9 days and up to four doses of either 44 μg interferon beta-1a (interferon beta-1a group plus remdesivir group) or placebo (placebo plus remdesivir group) administered subcutaneously every other day. Randomisation was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrolment. Patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to interferon beta-1a and placebo treatment; remdesivir treatment was given to all patients without masking. The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as the first day that a patient attained a category 1, 2, or 3 score on the eight-category ordinal scale within 28 days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all randomised patients who were classified according to actual clinical severity. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04492475. Between Aug 5, 2020, and Nov 11, 2020, 969 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (n=487) or to the placebo plus remdesivir group (n=482). The mean duration of symptoms before enrolment was 8·7 days (SD 4·4) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 8·5 days (SD 4·3) days in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Patients in both groups had a time to recovery of 5 days (95% CI not estimable) (rate ratio of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group vs placebo plus remdesivir 0·99 [95% CI 0·87–1·13]; p=0·88). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of mortality at 28 days was 5% (95% CI 3–7%) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 3% (2–6%) in the placebo plus remdesivir group (hazard ratio 1·33 [95% CI 0·69–2·55]; p=0·39). Patients who did not require high-flow oxygen at baseline were more likely to have at least one related adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (33 [7%] of 442 patients) than in the placebo plus remdesivir group (15 [3%] of 435). In patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline, 24 (69%) of 35 had an adverse event and 21 (60%) had a serious adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group compared with 13 (39%) of 33 who had an adverse event and eight (24%) who had a serious adverse event in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir was not superior to remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline had worse outcomes after treatment with interferon beta-1a compared with those given placebo. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (USA)