Metodología experimental aplicada a la Inmunología Molecular

El objetivo general del proyecto es aplicar un modelo pedagógico en el que participen los alumnos de manera activa y apliquen el método científico en base a los conocimientos que han adquirido, resolviendo y realizando un caso práctico en el laboratorio. Integra una estrategia didáctica que va a fomentar la participación activa del alumnado provocando un aprendizaje significativo, ya que el alumno tiene que resolver mediante el razonamiento un caso práctico y luego integrarlo en el laboratorio con el uso de una técnica ampliamente utilizada en Inmunología, como es la citometría de flujo.Depto. de Arquitectura de Computadores y AutomáticaFac. de InformáticaFALSEInnovasubmitte

Clinical, microbiological and treatment characteristics of severe postoperative respiratory infections: An observational cohort study

Respiratory infections are frequent and life-threatening complications of surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical, microbiological and treatment characteristics of severe postoperative pneumonia (POP) and tracheobronchitis (POT) in a large series of patients. This single-center, prospective observational cohort study included patients with POP or POT requiring intensive care unit admission in the past 10 years. We recorded demographic, clinical, microbiological and therapeutic data. A total of 207 patients were included, and 152 (73%) were men. The mean (SD) age was 70 (13) years and the mean (SD) ARISCAT score was 46 (19). Ventilator-associated pneumonia was reported in 21 patients (10%), hospital-acquired pneumonia was reported in 132 (64%) and tracheobronchitis was reported in 54 (26%). The mean (SD) number of days from surgery to POP/POT diagnosis was 6 (4). The mean (SD) SOFA score was 5 (3). Respiratory microbiological sampling was performed in 201 patients (97%). A total of 177 organisms were cultured in 130 (63%) patients, with a high proportion of Gram-negative and multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria (20%). The most common empirical antibiotic therapy was a triple-drug regimen covering MDR Gram-negative bacteria and MRSA. In conclusion, surgical patients are a high-risk population with a high proportion of early onset severe POP/POT and nosocomial bacteria isolation

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meropenem by extended or continuous infusion in low body weight critically ill patients

Background: Pathophysiological changes such as extreme body weights in critically ill patients with severe infections may alter the pharmacokinetics (PK) of antimicrobials, leading to treatment failure or toxicity. There are almost no PK data on meropenem in critically ill patients with low body weight (LwBW) and therefore information is lacking on the most appropriate dosing regimens, especially when administered by extended infusion. Objectives: To assess if the current administered doses of meropenem could lead to supratherapeutic concentrations in LwBW patients and to identify the factors independently associated with overexposure. Methods: A matched case-control 1:1 study of surgical critically ill patients treated with meropenem administered by extended or continuous infusion and undergoing therapeutic drug monitoring was conducted. Cases (patients with LwBW (body mass index (BMI) MIC was considered an optimal pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target and 100% fT > 10 × MIC as supratherapeutic exposure. Results: Thirty-six patients (18 cases and 18 controls) were included (median (range) age, 57.5 (26-75) years; 20 (55.6% male)). Meropenem was administered by 6 h (extended) or 8 h (continuous) infusion at a median (range) daily dose of 5 (1-6) g/day. Similar median meropenem trough plasma concentrations (Cmin,ss), measured pre-dose on day three to four of treatment) were observed in the two groups (19.9 (22.2) mg/L vs 22.4 (25.8) mg/L, p > 0.999). No differences in the proportion of patients with an optimal or a supratherapeutic PKPD target between cases and controls were observed. A baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 90 mL/min was the only factor independently associated with a supratherapeutic PK/PD target. Conclusions: LwBW seems not to be a risk factor for achieving a supratherapeutic PK/PD target in critically ill patients receiving meropenem at standard doses by extended or continuous infusion

Intrapulmonary concentrations of meropenem administered by continuous infusion in critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia: a randomized pharmacokinetic trial

Background: Optimal antimicrobial drug exposure in the lung is required for successful treatment outcomes for nosocomial pneumonia. Little is known about the intrapulmonary pharmacokinetics (PK) of meropenem when administered by continuous infusion (CI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the PK of two dosages of meropenem (3 g vs 6 g/day by CI) in the plasma and epithelial lining fluid (ELF) in critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia. Methods: Thirty-one patients (81% male, median (IQR) age 72 (22) years) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, clinical trial. Sixteen patients received 1 g/8 h and 15 2 g/8 h by CI (8 h infusion). Plasma and ELF meropenem concentrations were modeled using a population methodology, and Monte Carlo simulations were performed to estimate the probability of attaining (PTA) a free ELF concentration of 50% of time above MIC (50% fT>MIC), which results in logarithmic killing and the suppression of resistance in experimental models of pneumonia. Results: The median (IQR) of meropenem AUC0-24 h in the plasma and ELF was 287.6 (190.2) and 84.1 (78.8) mg h/L in the 1 g/8 h group vs 448.1 (231.8) and 163.0 (201.8) mg h/L in the 2 g/8 h group, respectively. The penetration ratio was approximately 30% and was comparable between the dosage groups. In the Monte Carlo simulations, only the highest approved dose of meropenem of 2 g/8 h by CI allowed to achieve an optimal PTA for all isolates with a MIC < 4 mg/L. Conclusions: An increase in the dose of meropenem administered by CI achieved a higher exposure in the plasma and ELF. The use of the highest licensed dose of 6 g/day may be necessary to achieve an optimal coverage in ELF for all susceptible isolates (MIC ≤ 2 mg/L) in patients with conserved renal function. An alternative therapy should be considered when the presence of microorganisms with a MIC greater than 2 mg/L is suspected

Awake prone positioning does not reduce the risk of intubation in COVID-19 treated with high-flow nasal oxygen therapy: a multicenter, adjusted cohort study

Background: Awake prone positioning (awake-PP) in non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients could avoid endotracheal intubation, reduce the use of critical care resources, and improve survival. We aimed to examine whether the combination of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO) with awake-PP prevents the need for intubation when compared to HFNO alone. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, adjusted observational cohort study in consecutive COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving respiratory support with HFNO from 12 March to 9 June 2020. Patients were classified as HFNO with or without awake-PP. Logistic models were fitted to predict treatment at baseline using the following variables: age, sex, obesity, non-respiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, APACHE-II, C-reactive protein, days from symptoms onset to HFNO initiation, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxyhemoglobin saturation. We compared data on demographics, vital signs, laboratory markers, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, days to intubation, ICU length of stay, and ICU mortality between HFNO patients with and without awake-PP. Results: A total of 1076 patients with COVID-19 ARF were admitted, of which 199 patients received HFNO and were analyzed. Fifty-five (27.6%) were pronated during HFNO; 60 (41/100) and 22 (40/100) patients from the HFNO and HFNO + awake-PP groups were intubated. The use of awake-PP as an adjunctive therapy to HFNO did not reduce the risk of intubation [RR 0.87 (95/100 CI 0.53–1.43), p equal 0.60]. Patients treated with HFNO + awake-PP showed a trend for delay in intubation compared to HFNO alone [median 1 (interquartile range, IQR 1.0–2.5) vs 2 IQR 1.0–3.0] days (p equal 0.055), but awake-PP did not affect 28-day mortality [RR 1.04 (95/100 CI 0.40–2.72), p equal 0.92].Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19 ARF treated with HFNO, the use of awake-PP did not reduce the need for intubation or affect mortality

Awake prone positioning does not reduce the risk of intubation in COVID-19 treated with high-flow nasal oxygen therapy: a multicenter, adjusted cohort study

Background: Awake prone positioning (awake-PP) in non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients could avoid endotracheal intubation, reduce the use of critical care resources, and improve survival. We aimed to examine whether the combination of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO) with awake-PP prevents the need for intubation when compared to HFNO alone. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, adjusted observational cohort study in consecutive COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving respiratory support with HFNO from 12 March to 9 June 2020. Patients were classified as HFNO with or without awake-PP. Logistic models were fitted to predict treatment at baseline using the following variables: age, sex, obesity, non-respiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, APACHE-II, C-reactive protein, days from symptoms onset to HFNO initiation, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxyhemoglobin saturation. We compared data on demographics, vital signs, laboratory markers, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, days to intubation, ICU length of stay, and ICU mortality between HFNO patients with and without awake-PP. Results: A total of 1076 patients with COVID-19 ARF were admitted, of which 199 patients received HFNO and were analyzed. Fifty-five (27.6%) were pronated during HFNO; 60 (41%) and 22 (40%) patients from the HFNO and HFNO + awake-PP groups were intubated. The use of awake-PP as an adjunctive therapy to HFNO did not reduce the risk of intubation [RR 0.87 (95% CI 0.53-1.43), p = 0.60]. Patients treated with HFNO + awake-PP showed a trend for delay in intubation compared to HFNO alone [median 1 (interquartile range, IQR 1.0-2.5) vs 2 IQR 1.0-3.0] days (p = 0.055), but awake-PP did not affect 28-day mortality [RR 1.04 (95% CI 0.40-2.72), p = 0.92]. Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19 ARF treated with HFNO, the use of awake-PP did not reduce the need for intubation or affect mortality