The best solution down the line: an observational study on taurolidine- versus citrate-based lock solutions for central venous catheters in hemodialysis patients

Introduction To prevent infection and thrombosis of central venous catheters (CVCs) in hemodialysis patients, different CVC lock solutions are available. Taurolidine-based solutions and citrate in different concentrations are frequently used, but no definite conclusions with regard to superiority have been drawn. Methods In this retrospective, observational, multicenter study, we aimed to assess the risk for removal of CVC due to infection or catheter malfunction in hemodialysis patients with CVC access for different lock solutions: taurolidine, high-concentrated citrate (46.7%) and low-concentrated citrate (4 or 30%). A multivariable Cox-regression model was used to calculate hazard ratio's (HR). Results We identified 1514 patients (median age 65 years, 59% male). In 96 (6%) taurolidine-based lock solutions were used. In 1418 (94%) citrate-based lock solutions were used (high-concentrated 73%, low-concentrated 20%). Taurolidine-based lock solutions were associated with a significantly lower hazard for removal of CVC due to infection or malfunction combined (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19-0.64), and for removal of CVC due to infection or malfunction separately (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.88 and HR0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.79). High-concentrated citrate lock solutions were not associated with a decreased hazard for our outcomes, compared to low-concentrated citrate lock solutions. Conclusion Removal of CVC due to infection or catheter malfunction occurred less often with taurolidine-based lock solutions. We present the largest cohort comparing taurolidine- and citrate-based lock solutions yet. However, due to the retrospective observational nature of this study, conclusions with regard to superiority should be drawn with caution.Clinical epidemiolog

Can oral corticosteroids reduce the severity or duration of an acute cough, and the associated National Health Service and societal costs, in adults presenting to primary care?: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) is one of the most common conditions managed internationally and is costly to health services and patients. Despite good evidence that antibiotics are not effective for improving the symptoms of uncomplicated LRTI, they are widely prescribed, contributing to antimicrobial resistance. Many of the symptoms observed in LRTI are mediated by inflammatory processes also observed in exacerbations of asthma, for which there is strong evidence of corticosteroid effectiveness. The primary aim of the OSAC (Oral Steroids for Acute Cough) Trial is to determine whether oral prednisolone (40 mg daily for 5 days) can reduce the duration of moderately bad (or worse) cough and the severity of all its associated symptoms on days 2 to 4 post-randomisation (day 1 is trial entry) by at least 20% in adults ≥18 years with acute LRTI presenting to primary care. Methods/design: OSAC is a two-arm, multi-centre, placebo-controlled, randomised superiority trial. The target sample size is 436 patients, which allows for a 20% dropout rate. Patients will be recruited from primary care sites (General Practitioner surgeries) across England and followed up until symptom resolution. The two primary clinical outcomes are the duration of moderately bad (or worse) cough, and the severity of all its associated symptoms on days 2 to 4 post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes include: antibiotic consumption; symptom burden; adverse events; participant satisfaction with treatment and intention to consult for future similar illnesses. A parallel economic evaluation will investigate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Discussion: Results from the OSAC trial will increase knowledge regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of corticosteroids for LRTI, and will establish the potential of a new treatment option that could substantially improve patient health. We have chosen a relatively high ‘efficacy dose’ as this will enable us to decide on the potential for further research into lower dose oral and/or inhaled corticosteroids. This trial will also contribute to a growing body of research investigating the natural course of this very common illness, as well as the effects of steroids on the undesirable inflammatory symptoms associated with infection. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN57309858 (31 January 2013)

Adjunctive Systemic Corticosteroids for Hospitalized Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 2015 Update

Previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses evaluated the efficacy and safety of adjunctive corticosteroids for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, the results from them had large discrepancies. The eligibility criteria for the current meta-analysis were original RCTs written in English as a full article that evaluated adjunctive systemic corticosteroids adding on antibiotic therapy targeting typical and/or atypical pathogen for treating hospitalized human CAP cases. Four investigators independently searched for eligible articles through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Random model was used. The heterogeneity among original studies and subgroups was evaluated with the I2 statistics. Of 54 articles that met the preliminary criteria, we found 10 eligible RCTs comprising 1780 cases. Our analyses revealed following pooled values by corticosteroids. OR for all-cause death: 0.80 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.53-1.21) from all studies; 0.41 (95% CI 0.19-0.90) from severe-case subgroup; 0.21 (95% CI 0.0-0.74) from intensive care unit (ICU) subgroup. Length of ICU stay: -1.30 days (95% CI (-3.04)-0.44). Length of hospital stay: -0.98 days (95% CI (-1.26)-(-0.71)). Length to clinical stability: -1.16 days (95% CI (-1.73)-(-0.58)). Serious complications do not seem to largely increase by steroids. In conclusion, adjunctive systemic corticosteroids for hospitalized patients with CAP seems preferred strategies

Recovery of dialysis patients with COVID-19 : health outcomes 3 months after diagnosis in ERACODA

Background. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related short-term mortality is high in dialysis patients, but longer-term outcomes are largely unknown. We therefore assessed patient recovery in a large cohort of dialysis patients 3 months after their COVID-19 diagnosis. Methods. We analyzed data on dialysis patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 1 February 2020 to 31 March 2021 from the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database (ERACODA). The outcomes studied were patient survival, residence and functional and mental health status (estimated by their treating physician) 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. Complete follow-up data were available for 854 surviving patients. Patient characteristics associated with recovery were analyzed using logistic regression. Results. In 2449 hemodialysis patients (mean ± SD age 67.5 ± 14.4 years, 62% male), survival probabilities at 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis were 90% for nonhospitalized patients (n = 1087), 73% for patients admitted to the hospital but not to an intensive care unit (ICU) (n = 1165) and 40% for those admitted to an ICU (n = 197). Patient survival hardly decreased between 28 days and 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. At 3 months, 87% functioned at their pre-existent functional and 94% at their pre-existent mental level. Only few of the surviving patients were still admitted to the hospital (0.8-6.3%) or a nursing home (∼5%). A higher age and frailty score at presentation and ICU admission were associated with worse functional outcome. Conclusions. Mortality between 28 days and 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis was low and the majority of patients who survived COVID-19 recovered to their pre-existent functional and mental health level at 3 months after diagnosis

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C). CONCLUSIONS: Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients

Relatively high serum vitamin D levels do not impair the antibody response to encapsulated bacteria

Vitamin D skews the immune system towards a more tolerogenic state. Therefore, a relatively high vitamin D status, i.e., within the normal physiological range, might result in a lower antibody response to infection and vaccination. We hypothesized, however, that vitamin D is primarily important in establishing immune homeostasis, implying that a relatively high vitamin D status would not hamper an adequate antibody response against pathogens. Our results show that the vitamin D status did not differ between responders and hypo-responders in patients infected with Streptococcus pneumoniae, as well as patients vaccinated against S. pneumoniae, Neisseria meningitidis type C (MenC), and/or Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib). Furthermore, specific IgG titers were not associated with the vitamin D status in patients vaccinated against S. pneumoniae and MenC, while there was a weak inverse association in Hib-vaccinated patients. These data indicate that a relatively high vitamin D status does not seem to hamper an adequate antibody response upon infection or vaccination, suggesting that vitamin D, in this setting, is not immunosuppressive

The effect of age on the systemic inflammatory response in patients with community-acquired pneumonia

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Increasing age has been associated with elevated circulating levels of pro-inflammatory mediators. We aimed to determine the impact of ageing on the systemic inflammatory response to CAP. In total 201 CAP patients were enrolled. Blood samples were obtained upon presentation, and on days 2, 3 and 5. For the current analysis patients≤50 and ≥80 years were included. The Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) score was calculated at presentation. The study encompassed 46 CAP patients aged ≤50 years (median 37 years) and 41 CAP patients aged ≥80 years (median 84 years). In both groups Streptococcus pneumoniae was the common causative microorganism. Whereas most young patients had a PSI score of I (54%), 98% of elderly patients had a PSI score≥III (p <0.001). Four elderly patients died vs. none of the young patients (p 0.045). Older patients demonstrated lower serum C-reactive protein levels on admission and during the course of their hospitalization (p 0.001) in spite of more severe disease. Serum concentrations of pro-inflammatory (interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8) and anti-inflammatory cytokines (IL-10 and IL-1 receptor antagonist) did not differ between age groups, although admission IL-8 levels tended to be higher in elderly patients (p 0.05). Cytokine levels were positively correlated with PSI in young but not in elderly patients. These results suggest that elderly patients show an absolute (C-reactive protein) or relative (cytokines) reduction in their systemic inflammatory response on admission for CA

Fosfomycin-Trometamol for Urinary Tract Infections in Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND: The treatment of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with oral antibiotics is complicated by increasing resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, and ciprofloxacin. Fosfomycin-trometamol (FT) could be an alternative, but evidence on clinical effectiveness is scarce. We evaluated the use, effectiveness and safety of FT for UTI in KTRs. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in 2 Dutch transplant hospitals from adult KTRs that were treated with FT as initial treatment for lower UTI or asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) or as stepdown treatment for upper UTI after initial intravenous antibiotics. Exclusion criteria were in vitro resistance to FT or concomitant antibiotic treatment. Endpoints were clinical cure within 14 days and severe clinical failure, microbiological cure, relapse, recurrence, and acquired resistance within 90 days postend of treatment. RESULTS: Fifty-three episodes in 40 KTRs were included (ASB, n = 15; lower UTI, n = 33; upper UTI, n = 5). Fosfomycin-trometamol was used for a median short duration in a heterogeneous gift interval. Fosfomycin-trometamol resulted in microbiological cure in 25%, 28%, and 100% of ASB, lower UTI and upper UTI with initial positive culture and follow-up culture performed, respectively. Clinical cure rates were 67% for lower UTI and 80% for upper UTI. Relapses or recurrences occurred in 31% and 24% of symptomatic UTI episodes, without severe clinical failure. Acquired resistance to fosfomycin was observed in 6 episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Fosfomycin-trometamol has a reasonable effectiveness as last-resort oral treatment for lower UTI and stepdown treatment for upper UTI in KTRs. Randomized controlled trials with optimal dosage regimens are warranted. Use of FT is not recommended for ASB