Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 31
Filter
1.
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol ; 134(5): 562-572, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2296779

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent infective endocarditis in indicated dental procedures. STUDY DESIGN: We searched on Medline/OVID, CINAHL/EBSCO, and EMBASE from January 2011 to January 2022. We included de novo guidelines and excluded adapted or adopted guidelines, and guidelines published before 2011. The guidelines were independently appraised by 4 reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument. RESULTS: Four eligible CPGs were appraised: the European Society of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the Japanese Circulation Society (JCS). Their AGREE II first overall assessments (OA1) were 63%, 58%, 92%, and 71%, respectively. Both NICE and JCS scored the highest in OA1 (>70%), Domain 3 Rigor of Development (85%, 65%), and Domain 5 Applicability (76%, 48%), respectively. The second overall assessment (OA2) of using the CPGs in daily practice was not significantly variable (recommended for use with modifications). CONCLUSION: Three out of 4 CPGs support that the benefits of prevention of infective endocarditis outweigh the risks of antibiotic resistance.


Subject(s)
Endocarditis, Bacterial , Endocarditis , Humans , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Endocarditis, Bacterial/prevention & control , Endocarditis/prevention & control , Endocarditis/drug therapy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 76(12): 2106-2115, 2023 Jun 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2239460

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are limited US data assessing adherence to surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines, particularly across a large, nationwide sample. Moreover, commonly prescribed inappropriate antimicrobial prophylaxis regimens remain unknown, hindering improvement initiatives. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults who underwent elective craniotomy, hip replacement, knee replacement, spinal procedure, or hernia repair in 2019-2020 at hospitals in the PINC AI (Premier) Healthcare Database. We evaluated adherence of prophylaxis regimens, with respect to antimicrobial agents endorsed in the American Society of Health-System Pharmacist guidelines, accounting for patient antibiotic allergy and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization status. We used multivariable logistic regression with random effects by hospital to evaluate associations between patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics and guideline adherence. RESULTS: Across 825 hospitals and 521 091 inpatient elective surgeries, 308 760 (59%) were adherent to prophylaxis guidelines. In adjusted analysis, adherence varied significantly by US Census division (adjusted OR [aOR] range: .61-1.61) and was significantly lower in 2020 compared with 2019 (aOR: .92; 95% CI: .91-.94; P < .001). The most common reason for nonadherence was unnecessary vancomycin use. In a post hoc analysis, controlling for patient age, comorbidities, other nephrotoxic agent use, and patient and procedure characteristics, patients receiving cefazolin plus vancomycin had 19% higher odds of acute kidney injury (AKI) compared with patients receiving cefazolin alone (aOR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.11-1.27; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines remains suboptimal, largely driven by unnecessary vancomycin use, which may increase the risk of AKI. Adherence decreased in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , Anti-Infective Agents , COVID-19 , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Adult , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Cefazolin/therapeutic use , Vancomycin/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/methods , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Surgical Wound Infection/drug therapy , Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic use , Hospitals , Acute Kidney Injury/drug therapy , Guideline Adherence
3.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(21): e25645, 2021 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2190994

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Since December 2019, pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), namely 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), has rapidly spread from Wuhan city to other cities across China. The present study was designed to describe the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, treatment, and prognosis of 74 hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Clinical data of 74 COVID-19 patients were collected to analyze the epidemiological, demographic, laboratory, radiological, and treatment data. Thirty-two patients were followed up and tested for the presence of the viral nucleic acid and by pulmonary computed tomography (CT) scan at 7 and 14 days after they were discharged.Among all COVID-19 patients, the median incubation period for patients and the median period from symptom onset to admission was all 6 days; the median length of hospitalization was 13 days. Fever symptoms were presented in 83.78% of the patients, and the second most common symptom was cough (74.32%), followed by fatigue and expectoration (27.03%). Inflammatory indicators, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) of the intensive care unit (ICU) patients were significantly higher than that of the non-ICU patients (P < .05). However, 50.00% of the ICU patients had their the ratio of T helper cells to cytotoxic T cells (CD4/CD8) ratio lower than 1.1, whose proportion is much higher than that in non-ICU patients (P < .01).Compared with patients in Wuhan, COVID-19 patients in Anhui Province seemed to have milder symptoms of infection, suggesting that there may be some regional differences in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 between different cities.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cough/epidemiology , Fever/epidemiology , Hyperbaric Oxygenation/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/statistics & numerical data , Blood Sedimentation , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , China/epidemiology , Cities/epidemiology , Cough/blood , Cough/therapy , Cough/virology , Female , Fever/blood , Fever/therapy , Fever/virology , Follow-Up Studies , Geography , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Young Adult
4.
J Cataract Refract Surg ; 48(1): 3-7, 2022 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2042649

ABSTRACT

In an online survey of >1200 global cataract surgeons, 66% were using intracameral (IC) antibiotic prophylaxis. This compared with 50% and 30% in the 2014 and 2007 surveys, respectively. Irrigation bottle infusion and intravitreal injection was each used by only 5% of respondents. For IC antibiotics, vancomycin was used by 6% in the United States (52% in 2014), compared with 83% for moxifloxacin (31% in 2014). Equal numbers used compounded moxifloxacin or the Vigamox bottle as the source. There was a decrease in respondents using preoperative (73% from 85%) and postoperative (86% from 97%) topical antibiotic prophylaxis; the latter was not used by 24% of surgeons injecting IC antibiotics. Reasons cited by those not using IC antibiotics include mixing/compounding risk (66%) and being unconvinced of the need (48%). However, 80% believe having a commercially approved IC antibiotic is important; if reasonably priced, this would increase adoption of IC prophylaxis to 93%.


Subject(s)
Cataract Extraction , Cataract , Endophthalmitis , Eye Infections, Bacterial , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Endophthalmitis/drug therapy , Endophthalmitis/prevention & control , Eye Infections, Bacterial/drug therapy , Eye Infections, Bacterial/prevention & control , Humans , Postoperative Complications/drug therapy , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 101(8): 889-900, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874382

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cesarean scar defect (CSD) is a long-term outcome of cesarean section (CS) and associated with numerous gynecological and obstetric problems. Previous studies indicate that infection may be a risk factor for CSD. Adjunctive azithromycin was shown to reduce the risk of postoperative infection in patients undergoing non-elective primary cesarean delivery in labor or after the rupture of membranes compared with standard antibiotic prophylaxis. This study investigated the protective effect of adjunctive azithromycin in combination with single-dose cephalosporin against CSD in women undergoing non-elective cesarean delivery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was conducted in a University hospital in Shanghai, China. A total of 242 women who underwent their first non-elective CS were randomly assigned to receive 1500 mg cefuroxime sodium plus 500 mg intravenous azithromycin (n = 121; experimental group) or 1500 mg cefuroxime sodium plus a placebo (n = 121; placebo group). The primary outcome was CSD prevalence, as determined by transvaginal ultrasound and saline infusion sonohysterography within 6 months of delivery. Secondary outcomes were changes in infectious indicators (eg hypersensitive C-reactive protein and procalcitonin), postoperative morbidity, and use of postoperative antibiotics. We also examined the operative procedure, pathogenic microorganism cultures, and fetal outcomes. Outcomes were compared between groups with the chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, or Student's t test. RESULTS: Between May 2018 and May 2021, 121 women were randomized to each arm. Because the sonographic follow up was disrupted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and strict management policies, we merged the follow-up time points (6 weeks and 6 months) into a single time period (6 weeks to 6 months); 104 and 108 women in the experimental and placebo groups, respectively, completed the first sonographic follow up. CSD was diagnosed by sonography in 34/104 (32.7%) and 50/108 (46.3%) patients in the experimental and placebo groups, respectively (relative risk 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.99; p = 0.043). Characteristics of CSD and short-term infection outcomes did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of intravenous 500 mg azithromycin adjunctive to single-dose cefuroxime prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of CSD in women undergoing non-elective CS.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/adverse effects , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Cefuroxime/therapeutic use , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Cesarean Section/methods , China , Cicatrix/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/drug therapy , Sodium
6.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(7)2022 03 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1841369

ABSTRACT

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common postoperative complications. Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) can prevent the occurrence of SSIs if administered appropriately. We carried out a retrospective cohort study to determine the incidence of SSIs and assess whether SAP were administered according to WHO guidelines for Caesarean section (CS) and herniorrhaphy patients in Bo regional government hospital from November 2019 to October 2020. The analysis included 681 patients (599 CSs and 82 herniorrhaphies). Overall, the SSI rate was 6.7% among all patients, and 7.5% and 1.2% among CS patients and herniorrhaphy patients, respectively. SAP was administered preoperatively in 85% of CS and 70% of herniorrhaphy patients. Postoperative antibiotics were prescribed to 85% of CS and 100% of herniorrhaphy patients. Ampicillin, metronidazole, and amoxicillin were the most commonly used antibiotics. The relatively low rate of SSIs observed in this study is probably due to improved infection prevention and control (IPC) measures following the Ebola outbreak and the current COVID-19 pandemic. A good compliance rate with WHO guidelines for preoperative SAP was observed. However, there was a high use of postoperative antibiotics, which is not in line with WHO guidelines. Recommendations were made to ensure the appropriate administration of SAP and reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Herniorrhaphy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Incidence , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , Sierra Leone/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , World Health Organization
7.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD013254, 2022 01 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1838124

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bronchiectasis is a common but under-diagnosed chronic disorder characterised by permanent dilation of the airways arising from a cycle of recurrent infection and inflammation. Symptoms including chronic, persistent cough and productive phlegm are a significant burden for people with bronchiectasis, and the main aim of treatment is to reduce exacerbation frequency and improve quality of life. Prophylactic antibiotic therapy aims to break this infection cycle and is recommended by clinical guidelines for adults with three or more exacerbations a year, based on limited evidence. It is important to weigh the evidence for bacterial suppression against the prevention of antibiotic resistance and further evidence is required on the safety and efficacy of different regimens of intermittently administered antibiotic treatments for people with bronchiectasis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intermittent prophylactic antibiotics in the treatment of adults and children with bronchiectasis. SEARCH METHODS: We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which contains studies identified through multiple electronic searches and handsearches of other sources. We also searched trial registries and reference lists of primary studies. We conducted searches on 6 September 2021, with no restriction on language of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least three months' duration comparing an intermittent regime of prophylactic antibiotics with placebo, usual care or an alternate intermittent regimen. Intermittent prophylactic administration was defined as repeated courses of antibiotics with on-treatment and off-treatment intervals of at least 14 days' duration. We included adults and children with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiectasis confirmed by high resolution computed tomography (HRCT), plain film chest radiograph, or bronchography and a documented history of recurrent chest infections. We excluded studies where participants received high dose antibiotics immediately prior to enrolment or those with a diagnosis of cystic fibrosis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA), primary ciliary dyskinesia, hypogammaglobulinaemia, sarcoidosis, or a primary diagnosis of COPD. Our primary outcomes were exacerbation frequency and serious adverse events. We did not exclude studies on the basis of review outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or relative risk (RRs) and continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs). We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We conducted GRADE assessments for the following primary outcomes: exacerbation frequency; serious adverse events and secondary outcomes: antibiotic resistance; hospital admissions; health-related quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight RCTs, with interventions ranging from 16 to 48 weeks, involving 2180 adults. All evaluated one of three types of antibiotics over two to six cycles of 28 days on/off treatment: aminoglycosides, ß-lactams or fluoroquinolones. Two studies also included 12 cycles of 14 days on/off treatment with fluoroquinolones. Participants had a mean age of 63.6 years, 65% were women and approximately 85% Caucasian. Baseline FEV1 ranged from 55.5% to 62.6% predicted. None of the studies included children. Generally, there was a low risk of bias in the included studies. Antibiotic versus placebo: cycle of 14 days on/off. Ciprofloxacin reduced the frequency of exacerbations compared to placebo (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93; I2 = 65%; 2 studies, 469 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), with eight people (95% CI 6 to 28) needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome. The intervention increased the risk of antibiotic resistance more than twofold (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.35; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 624 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events, lung function (FEV1), health-related quality of life, and adverse effects did not differ between groups. Antibiotic versus placebo: cycle of 28 days on/off. Antibiotics did not reduce overall exacerbation frequency (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.02; I2 = 0%; 8 studies, 1695 participants; high-certainty evidence) but there were fewer severe exacerbations (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93; I2 = 54%; 3 studies, 624 participants), though this should be interpreted with caution due to low event rates. The risk of antibiotic resistance was more than twofold higher based on a pooled analysis (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.42 to 3.42; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 685 participants; high-certainty evidence) and consistent with unpooled data from four further studies. Serious adverse events, time to first exacerbation, duration of exacerbation, respiratory-related hospital admissions, lung function, health-related quality of life and adverse effects did not differ between study groups. Antibiotic versus usual care. We did not find any studies that compared intermittent antibiotic regimens with usual care. Cycle of 14 days on/off versus cycle of 28 days on/off. Exacerbation frequency did not differ between the two treatment regimens (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.24; I2 = 71%; 2 studies, 625 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) However, inconsistencies in the results from the two trials in this comparison indicate that the apparent aggregated similarities may not be reliable. There was no evidence of a difference in antibiotic resistance between groups (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.48; I2 = 60%; 2 studies, 624 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events, adverse effects, lung function and health-related quality of life did not differ between the two antibiotic regimens. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, in adults who have frequent chest infections, long-term antibiotics given at 14-day on/off intervals slightly reduces the frequency of those infections and increases antibiotic resistance. Intermittent antibiotic regimens result in little to no difference in serious adverse events. The impact of intermittent antibiotic therapy on children with bronchiectasis is unknown due to an absence of evidence, and further research is needed to establish the potential risks and benefits.


Subject(s)
Bronchiectasis , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Bronchiectasis/drug therapy , Child , Ciprofloxacin/therapeutic use , Female , Fluoroquinolones/therapeutic use , Humans , Middle Aged
8.
Curr Oncol Rep ; 24(7): 835-842, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1750839

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Patients with hematological malignancies are recognized for their high susceptibility and increased risk of developing infections associated with immunosuppression that can be caused by the infection itself or by the treatments that condition a decrease in the humoral and T lymphocyte response, so this review attempts to gather the main bacterial, viral, parasitic, and fungal agents that affect them and give recommendations for their approach and diagnosis. RECENT FINDINGS: In recent years, with the discovery and use of new therapies including immunological and targeted treatments, it has been possible to improve the survival and response of patients with hematological malignancies; however, antimicrobial resistance has also increased; we have faced new and unknown microorganisms, such as the SARS-CoV-2 that caused the COVID-19 pandemic in the past year, and therefore, new risks and more severe infections are presented. We present a review of the different circumstances where hematological malignancies increased the risk of infections and which microorganisms affect these patients, their characteristics, and the suggested prophylaxis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematologic Neoplasms , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Hematologic Neoplasms/complications , Hematologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
10.
N Engl J Med ; 386(3): 230-240, 2022 01 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1630266

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic heart disease affects more than 40.5 million people worldwide and results in 306,000 deaths annually. Echocardiographic screening detects rheumatic heart disease at an early, latent stage. Whether secondary antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in preventing progression of latent rheumatic heart disease is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled trial of secondary antibiotic prophylaxis in Ugandan children and adolescents 5 to 17 years of age with latent rheumatic heart disease. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either injections of penicillin G benzathine (also known as benzathine benzylpenicillin) every 4 weeks for 2 years or no prophylaxis. All the participants underwent echocardiography at baseline and at 2 years after randomization. Changes from baseline were adjudicated by a panel whose members were unaware of the trial-group assignments. The primary outcome was echocardiographic progression of latent rheumatic heart disease at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 102,200 children and adolescents who had screening echocardiograms, 3327 were initially assessed as having latent rheumatic heart disease, and 926 of the 3327 subsequently received a definitive diagnosis on the basis of confirmatory echocardiography and were determined to be eligible for the trial. Consent or assent for participation was provided for 916 persons, and all underwent randomization; 818 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, and 799 (97.7%) completed the trial. A total of 3 participants (0.8%) in the prophylaxis group had echocardiographic progression at 2 years, as compared with 33 (8.2%) in the control group (risk difference, -7.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -10.2 to -4.7; P<0.001). Two participants in the prophylaxis group had serious adverse events that were attributable to receipt of prophylaxis, including one episode of a mild anaphylactic reaction (representing <0.1% of all administered doses of prophylaxis). CONCLUSIONS: Among children and adolescents 5 to 17 years of age with latent rheumatic heart disease, secondary antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the risk of disease progression at 2 years. Further research is needed before the implementation of population-level screening can be recommended. (Funded by the Thrasher Research Fund and others; GOAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03346525.).


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Penicillin G Benzathine/therapeutic use , Rheumatic Heart Disease/drug therapy , Adolescent , Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Child , Child, Preschool , Disease Progression , Echocardiography , Female , Humans , Injections, Intramuscular , Intention to Treat Analysis , Latent Infection/drug therapy , Male , Mass Screening , Penicillin G Benzathine/administration & dosage , Rheumatic Heart Disease/diagnostic imaging , Uganda
11.
13.
Int J Antimicrob Agents ; 59(1): 106471, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1487080

ABSTRACT

The role of probiotics in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) remains inconclusive. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of a probiotic regimen for VAP prophylaxis in mechanically ventilated multi-trauma patients, intubated immediately after the injurious insult. In a randomized, placebo-controlled study enrolling multi-trauma patients, patients expected to require mechanical ventilation for >10 days were assigned at random to receive prophylaxis with a probiotic formula (n=59) or placebo (n=53). The probiotic formula was a preparation of Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-5 [1.75 × 109 colony-forming units (cfu)], Lactobacillus plantarum (0.5 × 109 cfu), Bifidobacterium lactis BB-12 (1.75 × 109 cfu) and Saccharomyces boulardii (1.5 × 109 cfu) in sachets. Each patient received two sachets twice daily for 15 days: one through the nasogastric tube and one spread on the oropharynx. The incidence of VAP was the primary endpoint. The incidence of other infections and sepsis, and the duration of hospital stay were the secondary endpoints. Administration of probiotics reduced the incidence of VAP [11.9% vs 28.3%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13-0.92; P=0.034] and sepsis [6.8% vs 24.5%, odds ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.74: P=0.016]. Furthermore, probiotic prophylaxis reduced the time of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and the length of hospital stay. The prophylactic use of probiotics with a combination of enteral and topical application to the oropharynx had a positive effect on the incidence of VAP and sepsis, as well as on ICU and total hospital stay in patients receiving protracted mechanical ventilation.


Subject(s)
Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Bifidobacterium animalis/chemistry , Lactobacillus acidophilus/chemistry , Lactobacillus plantarum/chemistry , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/drug therapy , Probiotics/therapeutic use , Saccharomyces boulardii/chemistry , Adult , Female , Greece , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
16.
Updates Surg ; 73(5): 1775-1786, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274974

ABSTRACT

Several regimens of oral and intravenous antibiotics (OIVA) have been proposed with contradicting results, and the role of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is still controversial. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of oral antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing Surgical Site Infections (SSI) in elective colorectal surgery. In a multicentre trial, we randomized patients undergoing elective colorectal resection surgery, comparing the effectiveness of OIVA versus intravenous antibiotics (IVA) regimens to prevent SSI as the primary outcome (NCT04438655). In addition to intravenous Amoxicillin/Clavulanic, patients in the OIVA group received Oral Neomycin and Bacitracin 24 h before surgery. MBP was administered according to local habits which were not changed for the study. The trial was terminated during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many centers failed to participate as well as the pandemic changed the rules for engaging patients. Two-hundred and four patients were enrolled (100 in the OIVA and 104 in the IVA group); 3 SSIs (3.4%) were registered in the OIVA and 14 (14.4%) in the IVA group (p = 0.010). No difference was observed in terms of anastomotic leak. Multivariable analysis indicated that OIVA reduced the rate of SSI (OR 0.21 / 95% CI 0.06-0.78 / p = 0.019), while BMI is a risk factor of SSI (OR 1.15 / 95% CI 1.01-1.30 p = 0.039). Subgroup analysis indicated that 0/22 patients who underwent OIVA/MBP + vs 13/77 IVA/MBP- experienced an SSI (p = 0.037). The early termination of the study prevents any conclusion regarding the interpretation of the data. Nonetheless, Oral Neomycin/Bacitracin and intravenous beta-lactam/beta-lactamases inhibitors seem to reduce SSI after colorectal resections, although not affecting the anastomotic leak in this trial. The role of MBP requires more investigation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colorectal Surgery , Administration, Oral , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Bacitracin , Cathartics/therapeutic use , Colectomy , Colorectal Surgery/adverse effects , Elective Surgical Procedures , Humans , Neomycin , Pandemics , Preoperative Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control
17.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 78(Supplement_3): S76-S82, 2021 Aug 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1243455

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Patients with a reported ß-lactam allergy (BLA) are often given alternative perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, increasing risk of surgical site infections (SSIs), acute kidney injury (AKI), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The purpose of this study was to implement and evaluate a pharmacist-led BLA clarification interview service in the preoperative setting. METHODS: A pharmacist performed BLA clarification telephone interviews before elective procedures from November 2018 to March 2019. On the basis of allergy history and a decision algorithm, first-line preoperative antibiotics, alternative antibiotics, or allergy testing referral was recommended. The pharmacist intervention (PI) group was compared to a standard of care (SOC) group who underwent surgery from November 2017 to March 2018. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were included, with 50 (57%) and 37 (43%) in the SOC and PI groups, respectively. The most common surgeries included orthopedic surgery in 41 patients (47%) and neurosurgery in 17 patients (20%). In the PI group, all BLA labels were updated after interview. Twenty-three patients were referred for allergy testing, 12 of the 23 (52%) completed BLA testing, and penicillin allergies were removed for 9 of the 12 patients. Overall, 28 of the 37 (76%) pharmacy antibiotic recommendations were accepted. Cefazolin use significantly increased from 28% to 65% after the intervention (P = 0.001). SSI occurred in 5 (10%) patients in the SOC group and no patients in the PI group (P = 0.051). All of these SSIs were associated with alternative antibiotics. Incidence of AKI and CDI was similar between the groups. No allergic reactions occurred in either group. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a pharmacy-driven BLA reconciliation significantly increased ß-lactam preoperative use without negative safety outcomes.


Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Pharmacy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , Humans , Lactams , Retrospective Studies , beta-Lactams/adverse effects
18.
Br J Hosp Med (Lond) ; 82(3): 1-6, 2021 Mar 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1168179

ABSTRACT

Antibiotics are one of the most widely used classes of drugs within hospitals in the UK. They have a wide range of uses within all surgical specialties, both as preoperative prophylaxis and for treatment of acute surgical conditions. Antimicrobial resistance has increasingly been seen as a major issue, as the production of new antibiotics has decreased and overall use worldwide has increased. With the COVID-19 pandemic increasing concerns about antimicrobial resistance, there is an ever-increasing need for action. This article examines the particular challenges of antibiotic stewardship in surgical departments within the UK, and outlines possible solutions for improving adherence and reducing the risk of antimicrobial resistance in the future.


Subject(s)
Antibiotic Prophylaxis/methods , Antimicrobial Stewardship/methods , Surgery Department, Hospital , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Appendicitis/therapy , Cholecystitis/therapy , Diverticulitis/therapy , Humans , Preoperative Care , Surgical Wound Infection/drug therapy , United Kingdom
19.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 3: CD003427, 2021 03 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1135064

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a group of inherited disorders that result in haemoglobin abnormalities and other complications. Injury to the spleen, among other factors, contribute to persons with SCD being particularly susceptible to infection. Infants and very young children are especially vulnerable. The 'Co-operative Study of Sickle Cell Disease' observed an incidence rate for pneumococcal septicaemia of 10 per 100 person-years in children under the age of three years. Vaccines, including customary pneumococcal vaccines, may be of limited use in this age group. Therefore, prophylactic penicillin regimens may be advisable for this population. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in 2002, and previously updated, most recently in 2017.  OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis against pneumococcus in children with SCD receiving antibiotic prophylaxis compared to those without in relation to: 1. incidence of Streptococcus pneumoniae infection; 2. mortality (as reported in the included studies); 3. drug-related adverse events (as reported in the included studies) to the individual and the community; 4. the impact of discontinuing at various ages on incidence of infection and mortality. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register, which is comprised of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and also two clinical trials registries: ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Registry Platform (not in 2020 given access issues relating to Covid-19 pandemic). Additionally, we carried out hand searching of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Date of the most recent search: 25 January 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic antibiotics to prevent pneumococcal infection in children with SCD with placebo, no treatment or a comparator drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane were used. Both authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. The authors used the GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials were identified by the searches, of which three trials were eligible for inclusion. A total of 880 children, who were between three months to five years of age at randomization were included. The included studies were conducted in centres in the USA and in Kingston, Jamaica. In trials that investigated initiation of penicillin on risk of pneumococcal infection, the odds ratio was 0.37 (95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.86) (two trials, 457 children) (low-certainty evidence), while for withdrawal the odds ratio was 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.09 to 2.71) (one trial, 400 children) (low-certainty evidence). Adverse drug effects were rare and minor. Rates of pneumococcal infection were found to be relatively low in children over the age of five years. Overall, the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was judged to be low. The results from the risk of bias assessment undertaken identified two domains in which the risk of bias was considered to be high, these were incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) (two trials) and allocation concealment (selection bias) (one trial). Domains considered to have a low risk of bias for all three trials were selective reporting (reporting bias) and blinding (performance and detection bias). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence examined was determined to be of low certainty and suggests that prophylactic penicillin significantly reduces risk of pneumococcal infection in children with homozygous SCD, and is associated with minimal adverse reactions. Further research may help to determine the ideal age to safely withdraw penicillin.


Subject(s)
Anemia, Sickle Cell/complications , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Penicillins/therapeutic use , Pneumococcal Infections/prevention & control , Age Factors , Anemia, Sickle Cell/genetics , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/adverse effects , Bias , Child, Preschool , Hemoglobin SC Disease/complications , Homozygote , Humans , Incidence , Infant , Medication Adherence , Penicillins/adverse effects , Pneumococcal Infections/epidemiology , Pneumococcal Infections/mortality , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Streptococcus pneumoniae , beta-Thalassemia/complications
20.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 216(3): 563-569, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133848

ABSTRACT

Despite inferior vena cava (IVC) filter practice spanning over 50 years, interventionalists face many controversies in proper utilization and management. This article reviews recent literature and offers opinions on filter practices. IVC filtration is most likely to benefit patients at high risk of iatrogenic pulmonary embolus during endovenous intervention. Filters should be used selectively in patients with acute trauma or who are undergoing bariatric surgery. Retrieval should be attempted for perforating filter and fractured filter fragments when imaging suggests feasibility and favorable risk-to-benefit ratio. Antibiotic prophylaxis should be considered when removing filters with confirmed gastrointestinal penetration. Anticoagulation solely because of filter presence is not recommended except in patients with active malignancy. Anticoagulation while filters remain in place may decrease long-term filter complications in these patients. Patients with a filter and symptomatic IVC occlusion should be offered filter removal and IVC reconstruction. Physicians implanting filters may maximize retrieval by maintaining physician-patient relationships and scheduling follow-up at time of placement. Annual follow-up allows continued evaluation for removal or replacement as appropriate. Advanced retrieval techniques increase retrieval rates but require caution. Certain cases may require referral to experienced centers with additional retrieval resources. The views expressed should help guide clinical practice, future innovation, and research.


Subject(s)
Device Removal/methods , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Pulmonary Embolism/prevention & control , Vena Cava Filters , Vena Cava, Inferior , Venous Thrombosis/prevention & control , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Bariatric Surgery , COVID-19/complications , Device Removal/instrumentation , Endovascular Procedures , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Physician-Patient Relations , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Prosthesis Design , Recurrence , Risk Assessment , Vena Cava Filters/adverse effects , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Wounds and Injuries/complications
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL