OMon behalf of the REIPI (Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Disease) Group for the Study of Prosthetic Joint Infections/GEIO (Group for the Study of Osteoarticular Infections), SEIMC (Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiolo
on behalf of the REIPI (Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Disease) Group for the Study of Prosthetic Joint Infections/GEIO (Group for the Study of Osteoarticular Infections), SEIMC (Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiolo
+22
The aim of our study was to characterize the etiology of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs)—including multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO)—by category of infection. A multicenter study of 2544 patients with PJIs was performed. We analyzed the causative microorganisms according to the Tsukayama’s scheme (early postoperative, late chronic, and acute hematogenous infections (EPI, LCI, AHI) and “positive intraoperative cultures” (PIC)). Non-hematogenous PJIs were also evaluated according to time since surgery: 12 months. AHIs were mostly caused by Staphylococcus aureus (39.2%) and streptococci (30.2%). EPIs were characterized by a preponderance of virulent microorganisms (S. aureus, Gram-negative bacilli (GNB), enterococci), MDROs (24%) and polymicrobial infections (27.4%). Conversely, coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) and Cutibacterium species were predominant in LCIs (54.5% and 6.1%, respectively) and PICs (57.1% and 15.1%). The percentage of MDROs isolated in EPIs was more than three times the percentage isolated in LCIs (7.8%) and more than twice the proportion found in AHI (10.9%). There was a significant decreasing linear trend over the four time intervals post-surgery for virulent microorganisms, MDROs, and polymicrobial infections, and a rising trend for CoNS, streptococci and Cutibacterium spp. The observed differences have important implications for the empirical antimicrobial treatment of PJIs.
15 October 2021 in Journal of Clinical Investigation
BACKGROUND. Passive immunotherapy with convalescent plasma (CP) is a potential treatment for COVID-19. Evidence from controlled clinical trials is inconclusive. METHODS. We conducted a randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trial at 27 hospitals in Spain. Patients had to be admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia within 7 days from symptom onset and not on mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen devices. Patients were randomized 1:1 to treatment with CP in addition to standard of care (SOC) or to the control arm receiving only SOC. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in categories 5 (noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen), 6 (invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]), or 7 (death) at 14 days. Primary analysis was performed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS. Between April 4, 2020, and February 5, 2021, 350 patients were randomly assigned to either CP (n = 179) or SOC (n = 171). At 14 days, proportion of patients in categories 5, 6, or 7 was 11.7% in the CP group versus 16.4% in the control group (P = 0.205). The difference was greater at 28 days, with 8.4% of patients in categories 5–7 in the CP group versus 17.0% in the control group (P = 0.021). The difference in overall survival did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19–1.14, log-rank P = 0.087). CONCLUSION. CP showed a significant benefit in preventing progression to noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen, invasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO, or death at 28 days. The effect on the predefined primary endpoint at 14 days and the effect on overall survival were not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04345523. FUNDING. Government of Spain, Instituto de Salud Carlos III.
Evidence to support the use of steroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia is lacking. We aim to determine the impact of steroid use for COVID-19 pneumonia on hospital mortality. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study in a university hospital in Madrid, Spain, during March of 2020. To determine the role of steroids in in-hospital mortality, patients admitted with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia and treated with steroids were compared to patients not treated with steroids, and we adjusted with a propensity score for patients on steroid treatment. Survival times were compared using the log rank test. Different steroid regimens were compared and adjusted with a second propensity score. During the study period, 463 out of 848 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia fulfilled inclusion criteria. Among them, 396 (46.7%) patients were treated with steroids and 67 patients were not. Global mortality was 15.1%. The median time to steroid treatment from symptom onset was 10 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8 to 13 days). In-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with steroids than in controls (13.9% [55/396] versus 23.9% [16/67]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.51 [95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.96]; P = 0.044). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 41.8% relative to the mortality with no steroid treatment (relative risk reduction, 0.42 [95% confidence interval, 0.048 to 0.65]). Initial treatment with 1 mg/kg of body weight/day of methylprednisolone versus steroid pulses was not associated with in-hospital mortality (13.5% [42/310] versus 15.1% [13/86]; odds ratio [OR], 0.880 [95% confidence interval, 0.449 to 1.726]; P = 0.710). Our results show that the survival of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is higher in patients treated with glucocorticoids than in those not treated. Rates of in-hospital mortality were not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone and glucocorticoid pulses.
The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years,65 to 80 years,and ≥ 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 ≥ 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients ≥80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%,65 years; 20.5%,65-79 years; 31.3%,≥80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%,<65 years;30.1%,65-79 years;34.7%,≥80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%,≥80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age ≥ 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32-3.34), CCI ≥ 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39-1.88),and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16-1.58).When the three age groups were compared,the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group.