Individual risk factors predictive of venous thromboembolism in patients with temporary lower limb immobilisation due to injury: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Patients immobilised after lower limb injury are at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). There is international variation in the use of thromboprophylaxis for such patients. Risk based strategies have been adopted to aid decision making in many settings. The accuracy of these strategies is unclear. OBJECTIVES: A systematic review was undertaken to identify all individual patient identifiable risk factors linked to any VTE outcome following lower limb immobilisation. METHODS: Several electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2017. Any studies which included a measurement of VTE patient outcome in adults requiring temporary immobilisation (e.g. leg cast or brace in an ambulatory setting) for an isolated lower limb injury and reported risk factor variables were included. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to synthesise the evidence. RESULTS: Our database search returned 4771 citations, of which 15 studies reporting outcome data on 80,678 patients were eligible for analysis. Risk factor associations were reported through regression analyses, non-parametric tests and descriptive statistics. All studies were assessed as at moderate or serious risk of bias using the ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. Advancing age and injury type were the only individual risk factors demonstrating a reproducible association with increased symptomatic and/or asymptomatic VTE rates. Several risk factors currently used in scoring tools did not appear to be robustly evaluated for subsequent association with VTE, within these studies. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware of the limited evidence to support individual risk factors in guiding thromboprophylaxis use for this patient cohort

Prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of sepsis: 1st revision of S-2k guidelines of the German Sepsis Society (Deutsche Sepsis-Gesellschaft e.V. (DSG)) and the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI))

Practice guidelines are systematically developed statements and recommendations that assist the physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care measures for specific clinical circumstances taking into account specific national health care structures. The 1st revision of the S-2k guideline of the German Sepsis Society in collaboration with 17 German medical scientific societies and one self-help group provides state-of-the-art information (results of controlled clinical trials and expert knowledge) on the effective and appropriate medical care (prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care) of critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The guideline had been developed according to the “German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal” of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). In view of the inevitable advancements in scientific knowledge and technical expertise, revisions, updates and amendments must be periodically initiated. The guideline recommendations may not be applied under all circumstances. It rests with the clinician to decide whether a certain recommendation should be adopted or not, taking into consideration the unique set of clinical facts presented in connection with each individual patient as well as the available resources

Personalized medicine with IgGAM compared with standard of care for treatment of peritonitis after infectious source control (the PEPPER trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Peritonitis is responsible for thousands of deaths annually in Germany alone. Even source control (SC) and antibiotic treatment often fail to prevent severe sepsis or septic shock, and this situation has hardly improved in the past two decades. Most experimental immunomodulatory therapeutics for sepsis have been aimed at blocking or dampening a specific pro-inflammatory immunological mediator. However, the patient collective is large and heterogeneous. There are therefore grounds for investigating the possibility of developing personalized therapies by classifying patients into groups according to biomarkers. This study aims to combine an assessment of the efficacy of treatment with a preparation of human immunoglobulins G, A, and M (IgGAM) with individual status of various biomarkers (immunoglobulin level, procalcitonin, interleukin 6, antigen D-related human leucocyte antigen (HLA-DR), transcription factor NF-κB1, adrenomedullin, and pathogen spectrum). Methods/design: A total of 200 patients with sepsis or septic shock will receive standard-of-care treatment (SoC). Of these, 133 patients (selected by 1:2 randomization) will in addition receive infusions of IgGAM for 5 days. All patients will be followed for approximately 90 days and assessed by the multiple-organ failure (MOF) score, by the EQ QLQ 5D quality-of-life scale, and by measurement of vital signs, biomarkers (as above), and survival. Discussion: This study is intended to provide further information on the efficacy and safety of treatment with IgGAM and to offer the possibility of correlating these with the biomarkers to be studied. Specifically, it will test (at a descriptive level) the hypothesis that patients receiving IgGAM who have higher inflammation status (IL-6) and poorer immune status (low HLA-DR, low immunoglobulin levels) have a better outcome than patients who do not receive IgGAM. It is expected to provide information that will help to close the knowledge gap concerning the association between the effect of IgGAM and the presence of various biomarkers, thus possibly opening the way to a personalized medicine. Trial registration: EudraCT, 2016–001788-34; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03334006. Registered on 17 Nov 2017. Trial sponsor: RWTH Aachen University, represented by the Center for Translational & Clinical Research Aachen (contact Dr. S. Isfort)

Intra-abdominal candidiasis: The importance of early source control and antifungal treatment

Intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC) is poorly understood compared to candidemia. We described the clinical characteristics, microbiology, treatment and outcomes of IAC, and identified risk factors for mortality. We performed a retrospective study of adults diagnosed with IAC at our center in 2012-2013. Risk factors for mortality were evaluated using multi-variable logistic regression. We identified 163 patients with IAC, compared to 161 with candidemia. Types of IAC were intra-abdominal abscesses (55%), secondary peritonitis (33%), primary peritonitis (5%), infected pancreatic necrosis (5%), and cholecystitis/cholangitis (3%). Eighty-three percent and 66% of secondary peritonitis and abscesses, respectively, stemmed from gastrointestinal (GI) tract sources. C. albicans (56%) and C. glabrata (24%) were the most common species. Bacterial co-infections and candidemia occurred in 67% and 6% of patients, respectively. Seventy-two percent of patients underwent an early source control intervention (within 5 days) and 72% received early antifungal treatment. 100-day mortality was 28%, and highest with primary (88%) or secondary (40%) peritonitis. Younger age, abscesses and early source control were independent predictors of survival. Younger age, abscesses and early antifungal treatment were independently associated with survival for IAC stemming from GI tract sources. Infectious diseases (ID) consultations were obtained in only 48% of patients. Consulted patients were significantly more likely to receive antifungal treatment. IAC is a common disease associated with heterogeneous manifestations, which result in poor outcomes. All patients should undergo source control interventions and receive antifungal treatment promptly. It is important for the ID community to become more engaged in treating IAC