Shortening identification times: comparative observational study of three early blood culture testing protocols.

Background: While early appropriate antibiotic therapy is a proven means of limiting the progression of infections, especially bacteremia, empirical antibiotic therapy in sepsis is ineffective up to 30%. The aim of this study was to compare early blood culture testing protocols in terms of their ability to shorten the delay between blood sampling and appropriate antibiotic therapy. Methods: In this french observational study, we compared three blood culture testing protocols. Positive blood cultures were tested using either GenMark ePlex panels (multiplex PCR period), a combination of MRSA/SA PCR, ß-Lacta and oxidase tests (multitest period), or conventional identification and susceptibility tests only (reference period). Conventional identification and susceptibility tests were performed in parallel for all samples, as the gold standard. Results: Among the 270 patients with positive blood cultures included, early and conventional results were in good agreement, especially for the multitest period. The delay between a blood culture positivity and initial results was 3.8 (2.9-6.9) h in the multiplex PCR period, 2.6 (1.3-4.5) h in the multitest period and 3.7 (1.8-8.2) h in the reference period (p<0.01). Antibiotic therapy was initiated or adjusted in 68 patients based on early analysis results. The proportion of patients receiving appropriate antibiotic therapy within 48 h of blood sampling was higher in the multiplex PCR and multitest periods, (respectively 90% and 88%) than in the reference period (71%). Conclusion: These results suggest rapid bacterial identification and antibiotic resistance tests are feasible, efficient and can expedite appropriate antibiotic therapy.

Specific exposure of ICU staff to SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity: a wide seroprevalence study in a French city-center hospital.

BACKGROUND: Most hospital organizations have had to face the burden of managing the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak. One of the challenges in overcoming the influx of COVID-19 patients is controlling patient-to-staff transmission. Measuring the specific extent of ICU caregiver exposure to the virus and identifying the associated risk factors are, therefore, critical issues. We prospectively studied SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the staff of a hospital in Lyon, France, several weeks after a first epidemic wave. Risk factors for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were identified using a questionnaire survey. RESULTS: The overall seroprevalence was 9% (87/971 subjects). Greater exposure was associated with higher seroprevalence, with a rate of 3.2% [95% CI 1.1-5.2%] among non-healthcare staff, 11.3% [8.9-13.7%] among all healthcare staff, and 16.3% [12.3-20.2%] among healthcare staff in COVID-19 units. The seroprevalence was dramatically lower (3.7% [1.0-6.7%]) in the COVID-19 ICU. Risk factors for seropositivity were contact with a COVID-19-confirmed household (odds ratio (OR), 3.7 [1.8-7.4]), working in a COVID-19 unit (OR, 3.5 [2.2-5.7], and contact with a confirmed COVID-19 coworker (OR, 1.9 [1.2-3.1]). Conversely, working in the COVID-19-ICU was negatively associated with seropositivity (OR, 0.33 [0.15-0.73]). CONCLUSIONS: In this hospital, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was higher among staff than in the general population. Seropositivity rates were particularly high for staff in contact with COVID-19 patients, especially those in the emergency department and in the COVID-19 unit, but were much lower in ICU staff. Clinical trial registration NCT04422977.

Worrying decrease in hospital admissions for myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: How coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) is affecting management of myocardial infarction is a matter of concern, as medical resources have been massively reorientated and the population has been in lockdown since 17 March 2020 in France. AIMS: To describe how lockdown has affected the evolution of the weekly rate of myocardial infarctions (non-ST-segment and ST-segment elevation) hospital admissions in Lyon, the second largest city in France. To verify the trend observed, the same analysis was conducted for an identical time window during 2018-2019 and for an unavoidable emergency, i.e. birth. METHODS: Based on the national hospitalisation database [Programme de médicalisation des systèmes d'information (PMSI)], all patients admitted to the main public hospitals for a principal diagnosis of myocardial infarction or birth during the 2nd to the 14th week of 2020 were included. These were compared with the average number of patients admitted for the same diagnosis during the same time window in 2018 and 2019. RESULTS: Before lockdown, the number of admissions for myocardial infarction in 2020 differed from that in 2018-2019 by less than 10%; after the start of lockdown, it decreased by 31% compared to the corresponding time window in 2018-2019. Conversely, the numbers of births remained stable across years and before and after the start of lockdown. CONCLUSION: This study strongly suggests a decrease in the number of admissions for myocardial infarction during lockdown. Although we do not have a long follow-up to determine whether this trend will endure, this is an important warning for the medical community and health authorities.

[Toxoplasmosis seroconversion in pregnant women. The differing attitudes in France]. / Séroconversion toxoplasmique chez la femme enceinte. Les différentes attitudes françaises.

INTRODUCTION: Since 1992 France has been running a toxoplasmosis prevention program based on the serological detection of infections during pregnancy. In the absence of a consensus, the seroconversions discovered are managed in different ways, varying from one centre to another. OBJECTIVE: To describe the habits of the specialised centres in France and propose means to reduce the heterogeneity. METHODS: A survey using a questionnaire mailed to the centres of parasitology in France specialised in the management of toxoplasmosis seroconversion during pregnancy. RESULTS: All the 30 centres surveyed replied. Five of them do not provide recommendations for treatment and were excluded from analysis. The attitudes of the 25 other centres varied greatly with regard to the indications for therapeutic abortion and amniocentesis, treatment protocols with pyrimethamine and sulfamides, as well as in the frequency of sonographical monitoring. CONCLUSION: In the absence of National guidelines, the management of seroconversions discovered during the prenatal prevention of congenital toxoplasmosis program is left to the discretion of the specialised centre. This results in variations from one town to the next. This heterogeneity underlines the lack of knowledge on the most efficient and acceptable means of preventing and treating congenital toxoplasmosis. In order to improve this situation, the French parasitologists have launched a program of consensual meetings aimed at harmonising the treatment protocols and identifying the points that require further studies.