POLYCLONAL OUTBREAK OF BLOODSTREAM INFECTIONS CAUSED BY Burkholderia cepacia COMPLEX IN HEMATOLOGY AND BONE MARROW TRANSPLANT OUTPATIENT UNITS / Surto policlonal de infecção de corrente sanguínea causada pelo complexo Burkholderia cepacia em unidades de hospital-dia de hematologia e transplante de medula óssea

Aim: The objective was to describe an outbreak of bloodstream infections by Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc) in bone marrow transplant and hematology outpatients. Methods: On February 15, 2008 a Bcc outbreak was suspected. 24 cases were identified. Demographic and clinical data were evaluated. Environment and healthcare workers' (HCW) hands were cultured. Species were determined and typed. Reinforcement of hand hygiene, central venous catheter (CVC) care, infusion therapy, and maintenance of laminar flow cabinet were undertaken. 16 different HCWs had cared for the CVCs. Multi-dose heparin and saline were prepared on counter common to both units. Findings: 14 patients had B. multivorans (one patient had also B. cenopacia), six non-multivorans Bcc and one did not belong to Bcc. Clone A B. multivorans occurred in 12 patients (from Hematology); in 10 their CVC had been used on February 11/12. Environmental and HCW cultures were negative. All patients were treated with meropenem, and ceftazidime lock-therapy. Eight patients (30%) were hospitalized. No deaths occurred. After control measures (multidose vial for single patient; CVC lock with ceftazidime; cleaning of laminar flow cabinet; hand hygiene improvement; use of cabinet to store prepared medication), no new cases occurred. Conclusions: This polyclonal outbreak may be explained by a common source containing multiple species of Bcc, maybe the laminar flow cabinet common to both units. There may have been contamination by B. multivorans (clone A) of multi-dose vials.

O objetivo foi descrever um surto de infecções da corrente sanguínea por complexo B. cepacia (Bcc) nos ambulatórios de hematologia e transplante de medula óssea. Métodos: Em 15/02/2008, um surto de Bcc foi suspeitado. 24 casos foram identificados. Os dados demográficos e clínicos foram avaliados. Mãos de profissionais da saúde e ambiente foram cultivadas. Espécies foram determinadas e tipadas. Reforço da higiene das mãos, cuidados com cateteres, terapia de infusão e manutenção da câmara de fluxo laminar foram realizadas. 16 profissionais de saúde (PS) diferentes manipularam os cateteres. Heparina multidoses e soro eram preparadas em um balcão comum a ambas as unidades. Resultados: 14 pacientes tiveram B. multivorans (um paciente teve também B. cenopacia), 6 Bcc não-multivorans e um teve um agente não pertencente a Bcc. Clone A de B. multivorans ocorreu em 12 pacientes (da Hematologia), em 10 o cateter havia sido utilizado nos dias 11 ou 12 de fevereiro. Culturas ambientais e de PS foram negativos. Todos os pacientes foram tratados com meropenem e selo de ceftazidima. Oito pacientes (30%) foram hospitalizados. Não ocorreram mortes. Após as medidas de controle, nenhum novo caso ocorreu. Conclusões: Este surto policlonal pode ser explicado por uma fonte comum contendo várias espécies de Bcc, talvez a câmara de fluxo laminar comum a ambas as unidades. Pode ter havido contaminação por B. multivorans (clone A) de frascos multi-dose.

High rate of virologic suppression with darunavir/ritonavir plus optimized background therapy among highly antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected patients: results of a prospective cohort study in São Paulo, Brazil

OBJECTIVES: To assess the virologic and immunological response of darunavir/ritonavir plus optimized background therapy in highly antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected patients in Brazil. METHODS: Prospective cohort study carried out in a tertiary center in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Three-class antiretroviral-experienced patients with confirmed virologic failure began darunavir/ritonavir plus optimized background therapy (nucleoside/tide reverse transcriptase inhibitors ± raltegravir ± enfuvirtide ± maraviroc) after performing a genotypic resistance assay. Clinical evaluation and laboratory tests were collected at baseline and at weeks 12, 24, and 48. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of virologic response at 48 weeks. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were included. The median of darunavir resistant mutation was 1 (range 0-6). The median genotypic sensitivity score in the optimized background therapy was 2 (interquartile range 1-2). At week 48, 83% (95% CI: 75-90%) had an HIV RNA level <50 copies/mL and the median CD4 cell count was 301 (interquartile range 224-445) cells/mm³. Baseline HIV RNA >100 000 copies/mL was inversely associated with virologic success at week 48 (HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.06-0.85, p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Darunavir/ritonavir plus optimized background therapy was a highly effective salvage regimen under clinical routine conditions in a referral center in Brazil, which is similar to the reported in high-income countries.

Colonization pressure as a risk factor for colonization by multiresistant Acinetobacter spp and carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with colonization by carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and multiresistant Acinetobacter spp. METHODS: Surveillance cultures were collected from patients admitted to the intensive care unit at admission, on the third day after admission and weekly until discharge. The outcome was colonization by these pathogens. Two interventions were implemented: education and the introduction of alcohol rubs. Compliance with hand hygiene, colonization pressure, colonization at admission and risk factors for colonization were evaluated. RESULTS: The probability of becoming colonized increased during the study. The incidence density of colonization by carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa and multiresistant Acinetobacter spp. and colonization pressure were different between periods, increasing gradually throughout the study. The increase in colonization pressure was due to patients already colonized at admission. The APACHE II score, colonization pressure in the week before the outcome and male gender were independent risk factors for colonization. Every 1% increase in colonization pressure led to a 2% increase in the risk of being colonized. CONCLUSION: Colonization pressure is a risk factor for carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa and multiresistant Acinetobacter spp. colonization. When this pressure reaches critical levels, efforts primarily aimed at hand hygiene may not be sufficient to prevent transmission. .

Prevalence and factors associated with darunavir resistance mutations in multi-experienced HIV-1-infected patients failing other protease inhibitors in a referral teaching center in Brazil

Information about resistance profile of darunavir (DRV) is scarce in Brazil. Our objectives were to estimate the prevalence of DRV resistance mutations in patients failing protease inhibitors (PI) and to identify factors associated with having more DRV resistance mutations. All HIV-infected patients failing PI-based regimens with genotyping performed between 2007 and 2008 in a referral teaching center in São Paulo, Brazil, were included. DRV-specific resistance mutations listed by December 2008 IAS-USA panel update were considered. Two Poisson regression models were constructed to assess factors related to the presence of more DRV resistance mutations. A total of 171 HIV-infected patients with available genotyping were included. The number of patients with lopinavir, saquinavir, and amprenavir used in previous regimen were 130 (76 percent), 83 (49 percent), and 35 (20 percent), respectively. The prevalence of major DRV resistance mutations was 50V: 5 percent; 54M: 1 percent; 76V: 4 percent; 84V: 15 percent. For minor mutations, the rates were 11I: 3 percent; 32I: 7 percent; 33F: 23 percent; 47V: 6 percent; 54L: 6 percent; 74P: 3 percent; 89V: 6 percent. Only 11 (6 percent) of the genotypes had > 3 DRV resistance mutations. In the clinical model, time of HIV infection of > 10 years and use of amprenavir were independently associated with having more DRV resistance mutations. In the genotyping-based model, only total number of PI resistance mutations was associated with our outcome. In conclusion, the prevalence of DRV mutations was low. Time of HIV infection, use of amprenavir and total number of PI resistance mutations were associated with having more DRV mutations.