Impact of Initial Antifungal Therapy on the Outcome of Patients With Candidemia and Septic Shock Admitted to Medical Wards: A Propensity Score-Adjusted Analysis

13noBACKGROUND: Echinocandins are recommended as firstline therapy in patients with candidemia. However, there is debate on their efficacy in survival outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the choice of initial antifungal therapy improves mortality in patients with candidemia in relation to the presence of septic shock. METHODS: Patients with candidemia hospitalized in internal medicine wards of 5 tertiary care centers were included in the study (December 2012-December 2014). Patient characteristics, therapeutic interventions, and outcome were reviewed. Propensity score (PS) was used as a covariate of the multivariate analysis to perform a stratified analysis according to PS quartiles and to match patients receiving "echinocandins" or "azoles." RESULTS: Overall, 439 patients with candidemia were included in the study. A total of 172 (39.2%) patients had septic shock. Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in patients with septic shock (45.3%) compared with those without septic shock (31.5%; P = .003). Among patients with septic shock, the use of echinocandins in the first 48 hours, compared with azoles, did not affect 30-day mortality in the PS-adjusted Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-1.59; P = .48), the PS-stratified analysis, or the logistic regression model in matched cohorts (adjusted HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.51-1.63; P = .77). CONCLUSIONS: Echinocandin therapy seems not to improve the outcome of non-intensive care unit patients with septic shock due to candidemia. These findings support the urgent need of further studies in this patient population.openopenFalcone, Marco; Giusy, Tiseo; Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, Belen; Giammarco, Raponi; Paolo, Carfagna; Chiara, Rosin; Roberto, Luzzati; Diego, Delle Rose; Massimo, Andreoni; Alessio, Farcomeni; Mario, Venditti; Rodríguez-Baño, Jesus; Menichetti, FrancescoMarco, Falcone; Tiseo, Giusy; Belen, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez; Raponi, Giammarco; Carfagna, Paolo; Rosin, Chiara; Luzzati, Roberto; Delle Rose, Diego; Andreoni, Massimo; Farcomeni, Alessio; Venditti, Mario; Jesus, Rodríguez-Baño; Francesco, Menichett

Impact of Initial Antifungal Therapy on the Outcome of Patients With Candidemia and Septic Shock Admitted to Medical Wards: A Propensity Score-Adjusted Analysis

Echinocandins are recommended as firstline therapy in patients with candidemia. However, there is debate on their efficacy in survival outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the choice of initial antifungal therapy improves mortality in patients with candidemia in relation to the presence of septic shock

Risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections: a systematic review.

Rapid and widespread increases in carbapenem resistance (CR) necessitate identification of risk factors to guide appropriate interventions. We aimed to identify risk factors for CR Gram-negative infection through a systematic literature review. We searched MEDLINE (via OvidSP and PubMed) and Embase (via OvidSP) databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Prospective or retrospective cohort and case-control studies reporting quantitative data on risk factors associated with infections due to CR Gram-negative pathogens in hospitalized patients were eligible. Studies included hospitalized patients with CR infection caused by Gram-negative bacterial pathogens (Enterobacterales and non-fermenters). Searches were conducted in January 2018/December 2019 to identify studies published since 2007. Risk factor data were extracted and grouped by factor. The primary metric was proportion of studies reporting a significant association with CR infection for each factor. In total, 92 studies were identified. Risk factors most frequently reported as significantly associated with CR infection (>10 studies) were previous antibiotic use (91.1%; 72/79 studies); previous carbapenem use (82.6%; 57/69); previous colonization (72.7%; 8/11); mechanical ventilation (66.7%; 36/54); previous intensive care unit stay (64.4%; 38/59); dialysis (61.1%; 11/18); catheter (58.0%; 40/69); length of stay in hospital (54.5%; 30/55); comorbidities (52.7%; 39/74); APACHE II (51.7%; 15/29); and intubation (51.4%; 18/35). Risk factors were mostly consistent across different species and sites of infection. Several variables, particularly previous antibiotic use, are strong risk factors for CR infection. Interventions to mitigate against CR infection should target these factors

'The 3/3 strategy': a successful multifaceted hospital wide hand hygiene intervention based on WHO and continuous quality improvement methodology.

Background Only multifaceted hospital wide interventions have been successful in achieving sustained improvements in hand hygiene (HH) compliance. Methodology/Principal Findings Pre-post intervention study of HH performance at baseline (October 2007- December 2009) and during intervention, which included two phases. Phase 1 (2010) included multimodal WHO approach. Phase 2 (2011) added Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) tools and was based on: a) Increase of alcohol hand rub (AHR) solution placement (from 0.57 dispensers/bed to 1.56); b) Increase in frequency of audits (three days every three weeks: "3/3 strategy"); c) Implementation of a standardized register form of HH corrective actions; d) Statistical Process Control (SPC) as time series analysis methodology through appropriate control charts. During the intervention period we performed 819 scheduled direct observation audits which provided data from 11,714 HH opportunities. The most remarkable findings were: a) significant improvements in HH compliance with respect to baseline (25% mean increase); b) sustained high level (82%) of HH compliance during intervention; c) significant increase in AHRs consumption over time; c) significant decrease in the rate of healthcare-acquired MRSA; d) small but significant improvements in HH compliance when comparing phase 2 to phase 1 [79.5% (95% CI: 78.2-80.7) vs 84.6% (95% CI:83.8-85.4), p<0.05]; e) successful use of control charts to identify significant negative and positive deviations (special causes) related to the HH compliance process over time ("positive": 90.1% as highest HH compliance coinciding with the "World hygiene day"; and "negative":73.7% as lowest HH compliance coinciding with a statutory lay-off proceeding). Conclusions/Significance CQI tools may be a key addition to WHO strategy to maintain a good HH performance over time. In addition, SPC has shown to be a powerful methodology to detect special causes in HH performance (positive and negative) and to help establishing adequate feedback to healthcare workers

Impact of Initial Antifungal Therapy on the Outcome of Patients With Candidemia and Septic Shock Admitted to Medical Wards: A Propensity Score-Adjusted Analysis.

Echinocandins are recommended as firstline therapy in patients with candidemia. However, there is debate on their efficacy in survival outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the choice of initial antifungal therapy improves mortality in patients with candidemia in relation to the presence of septic shock. Patients with candidemia hospitalized in internal medicine wards of 5 tertiary care centers were included in the study (December 2012-December 2014). Patient characteristics, therapeutic interventions, and outcome were reviewed. Propensity score (PS) was used as a covariate of the multivariate analysis to perform a stratified analysis according to PS quartiles and to match patients receiving "echinocandins" or "azoles." Overall, 439 patients with candidemia were included in the study. A total of 172 (39.2%) patients had septic shock. Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in patients with septic shock (45.3%) compared with those without septic shock (31.5%; P = .003). Among patients with septic shock, the use of echinocandins in the first 48 hours, compared with azoles, did not affect 30-day mortality in the PS-adjusted Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-1.59; P = .48), the PS-stratified analysis, or the logistic regression model in matched cohorts (adjusted HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.51-1.63; P = .77). Echinocandin therapy seems not to improve the outcome of non-intensive care unit patients with septic shock due to candidemia. These findings support the urgent need of further studies in this patient population

Universal Risk Factors for Mortality in Bloodstream Infections (UNIFORM): a systematic review and Delphi survey

Background: Significant variations in the variables collected in clinical studies focusing on bacteremia lead to inconsistency in the evaluation of risk factors for mortality. Objective: We aimed to define a minimum set of risk factors that should be assessed and reported in all studies assessing survival in bacteremia. Study eligibility: We conducted a systematic review including observational prospective and retrospective cohort studies that assessed all-cause mortality among patients with bacteremia. We included only studies computing an adjusted analysis for mortality, with &gt;500 participants. Exposures: Independently significant risk factors for all-cause, preferably 30-day, mortality. Data sources: PubMed was used to identify eligible studies published between 2000-2020. A Delphi survey among experts was used to evaluate and prioritize the factors identified by the systematic review. Risk of bias: SIGN checklist complemented by risk of bias assessment of the adjusted analysis. Data synthesis: Definite universal risk factors were defined as those assessed in &gt;50% of all included studies and significant in &gt;50% of those. Potential universal risk factors were defined as those significant in &gt;50% of studies evaluating the factor and A subgroup analysis was performed for studies of Staphylococcus aureus (SA) bacteremia. Results: We included in the systematic review 62 studies, comprising more than 300,000 patients, from which a list of 17 risk factors was derived, whose association with all-cause mortality was statistically significant in most studies. The factors address baseline patient variables, the setting of infection acquisition, factors associated with the specific infection, the inflammatory response at onset of sepsis and management parameters where relevant. There were 14 risk factors for SA bacteremia. Conclusion: We identified a minimum set of universal factors to be collected, reported, and assessed, in all future studies evaluating factors associated with mortality in bacteremia to improve study quality and harmonization

Quorum sensing network in clinical strains of A. baumannii : AidA is a new quorum quenching enzyme

Acinetobacter baumannii is an important pathogen that causes nosocomial infections generally associated with high mortality and morbidity in Intensive Care Units (ICUs). Currently, little is known about the Quorum Sensing (QS)/Quorum Quenching (QQ) systems of this pathogen. We analyzed these mechanisms in seven clinical isolates of A. baumannii. Microarray analysis of one of these clinical isolates, Ab1 (A. baumannii ST-2-clon-2010), previously cultured in the presence of 3-oxo-C12-HSL (a QS signalling molecule) revealed a putative QQ enzyme (α/β hydrolase gene, AidA). This QQ enzyme was present in all nonmotile clinical isolates (67% of which were isolated from the respiratory tract) cultured in nutrient depleted LB medium. Interestingly, this gene was not located in the genome of the only motile clinical strain growing in this medium (A. baumannii strain Ab421-GEIH-2010 [Ab7], isolated from a blood sample). The AidA protein expressed in E. coli showed QQ activity. Finally, we observed downregulation of the AidA protein (QQ system attenuation) in the presence of HO (ROS stress). In conclusion, most of the A. baumannii clinical strains were not surface motile (84%) and were of respiratory origin (67%). Only the pilT gene was involved in surface motility and related to the QS system. Finally, a new QQ enzyme (α/β hydrolase gene, AidA protein) was detected in these strains

Comparison of predictors and mortality between bloodstream infections caused by ESBL-producing Escherichia coli and ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae

OBJECTIVE: To compare the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and mortality of patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli (ESBL-EC) versus ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (ESBL-KP) and to examine the differences in clinical characteristics and outcome between BSIs caused by isolates with CTX-M versus other ESBL genotypes METHODS: As part of the INCREMENT project, 33 tertiary hospitals in 12 countries retrospectively collected data on adult patients diagnosed with ESBL-EC BSI or ESBL-KP BSI between 2004 and 2013. Risk factors for ESBL-EC versus ESBL-KP BSI and for 30-day mortality were examined by bivariate analysis followed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The study included 909 patients: 687 with ESBL-EC BSI and 222 with ESBL-KP BSI. ESBL genotype by polymerase chain reaction amplification of 286 isolates was available. ESBL-KP BSI was associated with intensive care unit admission, cardiovascular and neurological comorbidities, length of stay to bacteremia >14 days from admission, and a nonurinary source. Overall, 30-day mortality was significantly higher in patients with ESBL-KP BSI than ESBL-EC BSI (33.7% vs 17.4%; odds ratio, 1.64; P=.016). CTX-M was the most prevalent ESBL subtype identified (218 of 286 polymerase chain reaction-tested isolates, 76%). No differences in clinical characteristics or in mortality between CTX-M and non–CTX-M ESBLs were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics and risk of mortality differ significantly between ESBL-EC and ESBL-KP BSI. Therefore, all ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae should not be considered a homogeneous group. No differences in outcomes between genotypes were detected. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT01764490. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;1–

Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Abstract Background Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). Methods In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care