9 research outputs found

    Advances in medicine and positive natural selection: Prosthetic valve endocarditis due to biofilm producer Micrococcus luteus

    No full text
    Over the past years there has been a considerable increase in the use of aortic bioprostheses for treating aortic valve disease. With the increasing use of implanted medical devices, the incidence of prosthetic valve endocarditis has also increased. This is accompanied by a shift in the microbiology of infectious endocarditis. Micrococcus species are usually regarded as contaminants from skin and mucous membranes that rarely cause infectious diseases, however, they have the capacity to create biofilms from prosthetic materials and hence, to cause disease. We report the case of a 54-year-old woman who developed native valve infective endocarditis due to Micrococcus luteus. To our knowledge, only 18 cases of M. luteus prosthetic valve endocarditis have been described, none in the English literature

    MMR vaccine adverse drug reactions reports in the CDC WONDER system, 1989-2019

    No full text
    Dissemination of misleading information regarding vaccine safety has contributed to the reduction in vaccination rates and the resurgence of diseases once considered eliminated. The CDC WONDER interface can be used to perform simple but powerful safety analyses and counter misinformation. The dissemination of false and misleading information regarding vaccine adverse reactions online has led to negative consequences, including raising parents' concerns about vaccine safety and fostering a growing opposition to the use of vaccines. However, health care workers can also use online resources to counter misinformation. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) is an online interface that allows health care workers to access the large-linked electronic health record database Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and perform near real-time vaccine safety analyses; hence it has the potential to become a powerful and accessible tool to provide information-driven decision-making regarding vaccine safety

    An overlooked cause of septic shock: Staphylococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome secondary to an axillary abscess

    No full text
    Staphylococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome (TSS) is characterized by rapid onset of fever, rash, hypotension, and multiorgan system involvement. Clinical manifestations of staphylococcal TSS include fever, chills, hypotension, and a diffuse macular erythroderma followed by desquamation one to two weeks later. The disease came to public attention in the 1980s with the occurrence of a series of menstrual-associated cases. However, the relative incidence of staphylococcal TSS not associated with menstruation has increased, and still, it remains an overlooked cause of septic shock. We present the case of a healthy 19-year-old male that presented with fever, chills, malaise, near-syncope, and a non-fluctuant, mobile nodule in the left armpit. The patient developed septic shock requiring critical care. He underwent extensive investigations resulting negative except for PCR for the detection of MRSA, raising the suspicion for STSS. For that reason, antibiotics for staphylococcal coverage were started, after which he started to improve. Ultimately, the mobile nodule evolved to fluctuant access. Incision and drainage was performed, and cultures confirmed the presence of Staphylococcus aureus

    Performance of the quick COVID-19 severity index and the Brescia-COVID respiratory severity scale in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in a community hospital setting

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the Quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI) and the Brescia-COVID Respiratory Severity Scale (BCRSS) in predicting intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and in-hospital mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 313 consecutive hospitalized adult patients (18 years or older) with confirmed COVID-19. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to assess the discriminatory power of the qCSI score and BCRSS prediction rule compared to the CURB-65 score for predicting mortality and intensive care unit admission. RESULTS: The overall in-hospital fatality rate was 32.3%, and the ICU admission rate was 31.3%. The CURB-65 score had the highest numerical AUC to predict in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.781) compared to the qCSI score (AUC 0.711) and the BCRSS prediction rule (AUC 0.663). For ICU admission, the qCSI score had the highest numerical AUC (AUC 0.761) compared to the BCRSS prediction rule (AUC 0.735) and the CURB-65 score (AUC 0.629). CONCLUSIONS: The CURB-65 and qCSI scoring systems showed a good performance for predicting in-hospital mortality. The qCSI score and the BCRSS prediction rule showed a good performance for predicting ICU admission

    Bleeding pneumonia: Diffuse alveolar hemorrhage due to human metapneumovirus

    No full text
    Diffuse alveolar hemorrhage is a condition with high morbidity and mortality. The majority of cases are caused by pulmonary capillaritis associated with systemic vasculitis. Infection disease has also been associated with this condition. A 62-year-old woman with a history of chronic alcohol abuse presented with shortness of breath, hemoptysis, constipation, and icterus. Chest x-rays on admission showed diffuse patchy opacities concerning for diffuse alveolar hemorrhage. The patient quickly developed acute respiratory failure requiring intubation. PCR identified human metapneumovirus and bronchoalveolar lavage confirmed alveolar hemorrhage. Despite all efforts, the patient ultimately developed multi-organ failure and died. Human metapneumovirus is usually associated with mild upper and lower respiratory tract infections in young children. Nevertheless, clinicians should recognize that this virus has recently emerged as a significant pathogen, particularly in adult patients with underlying conditions and the elderly population

    Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with seasonal coronavirus infection and COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

    No full text
    Abstract Background Unlike SARS-CoV and MERS-C0V, SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to become a recurrent seasonal infection; hence, it is essential to compare the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 to the existent endemic coronaviruses. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with seasonal coronavirus (sCoV) infection and COVID-19 to compare their clinical characteristics and outcomes. Methods A total of 190 patients hospitalized with any documented respiratory tract infection and a positive respiratory viral panel for sCoV from January 1, 2011, to March 31, 2020, were included. Those patients were compared with 190 hospitalized adult patients with molecularly confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 admitted from March 1, 2020, to May 25, 2020. Results Among 190 patients with sCoV infection, the Human Coronavirus-OC93 was the most common coronavirus with 47.4% of the cases. When comparing demographics and baseline characteristics, both groups were of similar age (sCoV: 74 years vs. COVID-19: 69 years) and presented similar proportions of two or more comorbidities (sCoV: 85.8% vs. COVID-19: 81.6%). More patients with COVID-19 presented with severe disease (78.4% vs. 67.9%), sepsis (36.3% vs. 20.5%), and developed ARDS (15.8% vs. 2.6%) compared to patients with sCoV infection. Patients with COVID-19 had an almost fourfold increased risk of in-hospital death than patients with sCoV infection (OR 3.86, CI 1.99–7.49; p < .001). Conclusion Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 had similar demographics and baseline characteristics to hospitalized patients with sCoV infection; however, patients with COVID-19 presented with higher disease severity, had a higher case-fatality rate, and increased risk of death than patients with sCoV. Clinical findings alone may not help confirm or exclude the diagnosis of COVID-19 during high acute respiratory illness seasons. The respiratory multiplex panel by PCR that includes SARS-CoV-2 in conjunction with local epidemiological data may be a valuable tool to assist clinicians with management decisions

    Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with seasonal coronavirus infection and COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

    No full text
    Background: Unlike SARS-CoV and MERS-C0V, SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to become a recurrent seasonal infection; hence, it is essential to compare the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 to the existent endemic coronaviruses. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with seasonal coronavirus (sCoV) infection and COVID-19 to compare their clinical characteristics and outcomes. Methods: A total of 190 patients hospitalized with any documented respiratory tract infection and a positive respiratory viral panel for sCoV from January 1, 2011, to March 31, 2020, were included. Those patients were compared with 190 hospitalized adult patients with molecularly confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 admitted from March 1, 2020, to May 25, 2020. Results: Among 190 patients with sCoV infection, the Human Coronavirus-OC93 was the most common coronavirus with 47.4% of the cases. When comparing demographics and baseline characteristics, both groups were of similar age (sCoV: 74 years vs. COVID-19: 69 years) and presented similar proportions of two or more comorbidities (sCoV: 85.8% vs. COVID-19: 81.6%). More patients with COVID-19 presented with severe disease (78.4% vs. 67.9%), sepsis (36.3% vs. 20.5%), and developed ARDS (15.8% vs. 2.6%) compared to patients with sCoV infection. Patients with COVID-19 had an almost fourfold increased risk of in-hospital death than patients with sCoV infection (OR 3.86, CI 1.99–7.49; p <.001). Conclusion: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 had similar demographics and baseline characteristics to hospitalized patients with sCoV infection; however, patients with COVID-19 presented with higher disease severity, had a higher case-fatality rate, and increased risk of death than patients with sCoV. Clinical findings alone may not help confirm or exclude the diagnosis of COVID-19 during high acute respiratory illness seasons. The respiratory multiplex panel by PCR that includes SARS-CoV-2 in conjunction with local epidemiological data may be a valuable tool to assist clinicians with management decisions

    Global attitudes in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic: ACIE Appy Study

    No full text
    Background: Surgical strategies are being adapted to face the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations on the management of acute appendicitis have been based on expert opinion, but very little evidence is available. This study addressed that dearth with a snapshot of worldwide approaches to appendicitis. Methods: The Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe designed an online survey to assess the current attitude of surgeons globally regarding the management of patients with acute appendicitis during the pandemic. Questions were divided into baseline information, hospital organization and screening, personal protective equipment, management and surgical approach, and patient presentation before versus during the pandemic. Results: Of 744 answers, 709 (from 66 countries) were complete and were included in the analysis. Most hospitals were treating both patients with and those without COVID. There was variation in screening indications and modality used, with chest X-ray plus molecular testing (PCR) being the commonest (19\ub78 per cent). Conservative management of complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis was used by 6\ub76 and 2\ub74 per cent respectively before, but 23\ub77 and 5\ub73 per cent, during the pandemic (both P < 0\ub7001). One-third changed their approach from laparoscopic to open surgery owing to the popular (but evidence-lacking) advice from expert groups during the initial phase of the pandemic. No agreement on how to filter surgical smoke plume during laparoscopy was identified. There was an overall reduction in the number of patients admitted with appendicitis and one-third felt that patients who did present had more severe appendicitis than they usually observe. Conclusion: Conservative management of mild appendicitis has been possible during the pandemic. The fact that some surgeons switched to open appendicectomy may reflect the poor guidelines that emanated in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2
    corecore