Posts filed under ‘REVIEWS’

Invasive streptococcal disease: a review for clinicians.

Br Med Bull. 2015 Sep;115(1):77-89.

Parks T1, Barrett L2, Jones N3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Streptococci are a genus of Gram-positive bacteria which cause diverse human diseases. Many of these species have the potential to cause invasive infection resulting from the presence of bacteria in a normally sterile site.

SOURCES OF DATA:

Original articles, reviews and guidelines.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT:

Invasive infection by a streptococcus species usually causes life-threatening illness. When measured in terms of deaths, disability and cost, these infections remain an important threat to health in the UK. Overall they are becoming more frequent among the elderly and those with underlying chronic illness. New observational evidence has become available to support the use of clindamycin and intravenous immunoglobulin in invasive Group A streptococcal disease.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY:

Few interventions for the treatment and prevention of these infections have undergone rigorous evaluation in clinical trials. For example, the role of preventative strategies such as screening of pregnant women to prevent neonatal invasive Group B streptococcal disease needs to be clarified.

FUTURE PROSPECTS:

Studies of invasive streptococcal disease are challenging to undertake, not least because individual hospitals treat relatively few confirmed cases. Instead clinicians and scientists must work together to build national and international networks with the aim of developing a more complete evidence base for the treatment and prevention of these devastating infections.

abstract

https://academic.oup.com/bmb/article/115/1/77/260207

PDF (CLIC en PDF)

Advertisements

September 21, 2018 at 8:20 am

Group A Streptococcus Toxic Shock Syndrome: An outbreak report and review of the literature.

J Infect Public Health. 2012 Dec;5(6):388-93.

Al-ajmi JA1, Hill P, O’ Boyle C, Garcia ML, Malkawi M, George A, Saleh F, Lukose B, Ali BA, Elsheikh M.

Abstract

Group A Streptococcal (GAS) Toxic Shock Syndrome (TSS) is an acute, rapidly progressive, and often fatal illness. Outbreaks can occur in hospitals. However, early infection control measures may interrupt transmissions and prevent morbidity and mortality. Two cases of invasive GAS TSS were diagnosed within 48h after two uncomplicated laparoscopic surgeries that were performed in the same operating room of a women’s hospital. Investigations conducted by the infection prevention and control department of the hospital identified 46 obstetrical staff members who were involved in the surgeries and/or had contact with either of the patients. All of the staff members were interviewed regarding any recent history of upper respiratory tract infections, the presence of skin lesions and vaginal or rectal symptoms. Throat, rectal, and vaginal cultures were obtained two times from all of the involved staff members. Throat colonization with GAS was detected in the cultures from one obstetrical intern who attended the 1st surgery and from one nurse who had formerly worked in the postnatal ward. These two strains were epidemiologically different from each other and from the outbreak strain. Both carriers were suspended from direct patient care and were treated with a ten-day course of oral clindamycin. The success of their decolonization status was assessed at the end of therapy and at three, six, nine and twelve months thereafter before reassigning them to routine work. Unfortunately, in spite of the extensive investigation of all involved personnel and of the environment, the mode of transmission to the second patient could not be established. However, droplet or airborne transmission could not be ruled out. Early and meticulous implementation of infection control measures was crucial and instrumental in the successful management and control of this outbreak. Furthermore, there were no subsequent GAS cases detected during the 24 months following the outbreak.

PDF

https://www.jiph.org/article/S1876-0341(12)00104-9/pdf

September 21, 2018 at 8:17 am

Comparison Between Carbapenems and β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitors in the Treatment for Bloodstream Infections Caused by Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Open Forum Infect Dis. 16 May 2017;4(2):ofx099.

Muhammed M, Flokas ME, Detsis M, Alevizakos M, y col.  

Background.

Carbapenems are widely used for the management of bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-PE). However, the wide use of carbapenems has been associated with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae development.

Methods.

We searched the PubMed and Scopus databases (last search date was on June 1, 2016) looking for studies that reported mortality in adult patients with ESBL-PE BSIs that were treated with carbapenems or β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors (BL/BLIs).

Results.

Fourteen studies reported mortality data in adult patients with ESBL-PE BSI that were treated with carbapenems or BL/BLIs. Among them, 13 studies reported extractable data on empiric therapy, with no statistically significant difference in mortality of patients with ESBL-PE BSI that were treated empirically with carbapenems (22.1%; 121 of 547), compared with those that received empiric BL/BLIs (20.5%; 109 of 531; relative risk [RR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83–1.37; I2 = 20.7%; P = .241). In addition, 7 studies reported data on definitive therapy. In total, 767 patients (79.3%) received carbapenems and 199 patients (20.6%) received BL/BLIs as definitive therapy, and there was again no statistically significant difference (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.25–1.52; I2 = 84.6%; P < .001). Regarding specific pathogens, the use of empiric BL/BLIs in patients with BSI due to ESBL-Escherichia coli was not associated with a statistically significant difference in mortality (RR, 1.014; 95% CI, 0.491–2.095; I2 = 62.5%; P = .046), compared with the use of empiric carbapenems.

Conclusions.

These data do not support the wide use of carbapenems as empiric therapy, and BL/BLIs might be effective agents for initial/empiric therapy for patients with BSI caused by likely ESBL-PE, and especially ESBL-E coli.

FULL TEXT

https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/4/2/ofx099/3828264

PDF (HACER CLIC en PDF)

 

September 20, 2018 at 3:31 pm

A Guide to Utilization of the Microbiology Laboratory for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: 2018 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Society for Microbiology

Clinical Infectious Diseases September 15, 2018 V.67 N.6 P.813–816

IDSA GUIDELINE

J Michael Miller; Matthew J Binnicker; Sheldon Campbell; Karen C Carroll; Kimberle C Chapin …

The critical nature of the microbiology laboratory in infectious disease diagnosis calls for a close, positive working relationship between the physician/advanced practice provider and the microbiologists who provide enormous value to the healthcare team.

This document, developed by experts in laboratory and adult and pediatric clinical medicine, provides information on which tests are valuable and in which contexts, and on tests that add little or no value for diagnostic decisions.

This document presents a system-based approach rather than specimen-based approach, and includes bloodstream and cardiovascular system infections, central nervous system infections, ocular infections, soft tissue infections of the head and neck, upper and lower respiratory infections, infections of the gastrointestinal tract, intra-abdominal infections, bone and joint infections, urinary tract infections, genital infections, and other skin and soft tissue infections; or into etiologic agent groups, including arthropod-borne infections, viral syndromes, and blood and tissue parasite infections.

Each section contains introductory concepts, a summary of key points, and detailed tables that list suspected agents; the most reliable tests to order; the samples (and volumes) to collect in order of preference; specimen transport devices, procedures, times, and temperatures; and detailed notes on specific issues regarding the test methods, such as when tests are likely to require a specialized laboratory or have prolonged turnaround times.

In addition, the pediatric needs of specimen management are also emphasized. There is intentional redundancy among the tables and sections, as many agents and assay choices overlap.

The document is intended to serve as a guidance for physicians in choosing tests that will aid them to quickly and accurately diagnose infectious diseases in their patients.

FULL TEXT

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/67/6/813/5088024

PDF (CLIC en PDF)

September 2, 2018 at 10:40 am

Effects of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for the Prevention of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection on Sexual Risk Behavior in Men Who Have Sex With Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1, 2018 V.67 N.5 P.676–686

EDITOR’S CHOICE

Michael W Traeger; Sophia E Schroeder; Edwina J Wright; Margaret E Hellard; Vincent J Cornelisse..

This systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 open-label studies published to 2017 found that daily HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis use among men who have sex with men is associated with increased sexually transmitted infection diagnoses and an increase in condomless sex.

Background

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is effective in reducing HIV risk in men who have sex with men (MSM). However, concerns remain that risk compensation in PrEP users may lead to decreased condom use and increased incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). We assessed the impact of PrEP on sexual risk outcomes in MSM.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of open-label studies published to August 2017 that reported sexual risk outcomes in the context of daily oral PrEP use in HIV-negative MSM and transgender women. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis, and a qualitative review and risk of bias assessment were performed.

Results

Sixteen observational studies and 1 open-label trial met selection criteria. Eight studies with a total of 4388 participants reported STI prevalence, and 13 studies with a total of 5008 participants reported change in condom use. Pre-exposure prophylaxis use was associated with a significant increase in rectal chlamydia (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19–2.13) and an increase in any STI diagnosis (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, .99–1.54). The association of PrEP use with STI diagnoses was stronger in later studies. Most studies showed evidence of an increase in condomless sex among PrEP users.

Conclusion

Findings highlight the importance of efforts to minimize STIs among PrEP users and their sexual partners. Monitoring of risk compensation among MSM in the context of PrEP scale-up is needed to assess the impact of PrEP on the sexual health of MSM and to inform preventive strategies.

FULL TEXT

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/67/5/676/4917600

PDF (CLIC en PDF)

September 2, 2018 at 10:36 am

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Drug Resistance: 2018 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

Clinical Infectious Diseases July 20, 2018             

Günthard HF1, Calvez V2, Paredes R3,4, Pillay D5, Shafer RW6, Wensing AM7, Jacobsen DM8, Richman DD9.

Author information

1 University Hospital Zürich and Institute of Medical Virology, University of Zurich, Switzerland.

2 Pierre et Marie Curie University and Pitié-Salpêtriere Hospital, Paris, France.

3 Infectious Diseases Service and IrsiCaixa AIDS Research Institute, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.

4 Africa Health Research Institute, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa.

5 University College London, United Kingdom.

6 Stanford University Medical School, California.

7 University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands.

8 International Antiviral Society-USA, San Francisco.

9 Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System and University of California San Diego.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Contemporary antiretroviral therapies (ART) and management strategies have diminished both human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment failure and the acquired resistance to drugs in resource-rich regions, but transmission of drug-resistant viruses has not similarly decreased. In low- and middle-income regions, ART roll-out has improved outcomes, but has resulted in increasing acquired and transmitted resistances. Our objective was to review resistance to ART drugs and methods to detect it, and to provide updated recommendations for testing and monitoring for drug resistance in HIV-infected individuals.

METHODS:

A volunteer panel of experts appointed by the International Antiviral (formerly AIDS) Society-USA reviewed relevant peer-reviewed data that were published or presented at scientific conferences. Recommendations were rated according to the strength of the recommendation and quality of the evidence, and reached by full panel consensus.

RESULTS:

Resistance testing remains a cornerstone of ART. It is recommended in newly-diagnosed individuals and in patients in whom ART has failed. Testing for transmitted integrase strand-transfer inhibitor resistance is currently not recommended, but this may change as more resistance emerges with widespread use. Sanger-based and next-generation sequencing approaches are each suited for genotypic testing. Testing for minority variants harboring drug resistance may only be considered if treatments depend on a first-generation nonnucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Different HIV-1 subtypes do not need special considerations regarding resistance testing.

CONCLUSIONS:

Testing for HIV drug resistance in drug-naive individuals and in patients in whom antiretroviral drugs are failing, and the appreciation of the role of testing, are crucial to the prevention and management of failure of ART.

FULL TEXT

https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciy463/5055715

PDF (CLIC en PDF)

August 21, 2018 at 8:09 am

The Effect of Preoperative Antimicrobial Prophylaxis on Intraoperative Culture Results in Patients with a Suspected or Confirmed Prosthetic Joint Infection: a Systematic Review.

J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Sep;55(9):2765-2774.                    

Wouthuyzen-Bakker M1, Benito N2, Soriano A3.

Author information

1 Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands m.wouthuyzen-bakker@umcg.nl.

2 Infectious Diseases Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

3 Service of Infectious Diseases, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain.

Abstract

Obtaining reliable cultures during revision arthroplasty is important to adequately diagnose and treat a prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The influence of antimicrobial prophylaxis on culture results remains unclear. Since withholding prophylaxis increases the risk for surgical site infections, clarification on this topic is critical. A systematic review was performed with the following research question: in patients who undergo revision surgery of a prosthetic joint, does preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis affect the culture yield of intraoperative samples in comparison with nonpreoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis? Seven articles were included in the final analysis. In most studies, standard diagnostic culture techniques were used. In patients with a PJI, pooled analysis showed a culture yield of 88% (145/165) in the prophylaxis group versus 95% (344/362) in the nonprophylaxis group (P = 0.004). Subanalysis of patients with chronic PJIs showed positive cultures in 88% (78/89) versus 91% (52/57), respectively (P = 0.59). In patients with a suspected chronic infection, a maximum difference of 4% in culture yield between the prophylaxis and nonprophylaxis groups was observed. With the use of standard culture techniques, antimicrobial prophylaxis seems to affect cultures in a minority of patients. Along with the known risk of surgical site infections due to inadequate timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis, we discourage the postponement of prophylaxis until tissue samples are obtained in revision surgery. Future studies are necessary to conclude whether the small percentage of false-negative cultures after prophylaxis can be further reduced with the use of more-sensitive culture techniques, like sonication.

PDF

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5648712/pdf/zjm2765.pdf

 

July 31, 2018 at 6:50 pm

Older Posts


Calendar

September 2018
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Posts by Month

Posts by Category