Objectives: Conestat alfa, a recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor, is a multi-target inhibitor of inflammatory cascades including the complement, the kinin-kallikrein and the contact activation system. The study objective is to investigate the efficacy and safety of conestat alfa in improving disease severity and short-term outcome in COVID-19 patients with pulmonary disease. Trial design: This study is an investigator-initiated, randomized (2:1 ratio), open-label, parallel-group, controlled, multi-center, phase 2a clinical trial. Participants: This trial is conducted in 3 hospitals in Switzerland, 1 hospital in Brazil and 1 hospital in Mexico (academic and non-academic). All patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization for at least 3 calendar days for severe COVID-19 will be screened for study eligibility. Inclusion criteria: - Signed informed consent - Age 18-85 years - Evidence of pulmonary involvement on CT scan or X-ray of the chest - Duration of symptoms associated with COVID-19 ≤ 10 days - At least one of the following risk factors for progression to mechanical ventilation on the day of enrolment: 1) Arterial hypertension 2) ≥ 50 years 3) Obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) 4) History of cardiovascular disease 5) Chronic pulmonary disease 6) Chronic renal disease 7) C-reactive protein > 35mg/L 8) Oxygen saturation at rest of ≤ 94% when breathing ambient air Exclusion criteria: - Incapacity or inability to provide informed consent - Contraindications to the class of drugs under investigation (C1 esterase inhibitor) - Treatment with tocilizumab or another IL-6R or IL-6 inhibitor before enrolment - History or suspicion of allergy to rabbits - Pregnancy or breast feeding - Active or anticipated treatment with any other complement inhibitor - Liver cirrhosis (any Child-Pugh score) - Admission to an ICU on the day or anticipated within the next 24 hours of enrolment - Invasive or non-invasive ventilation - Participation in another study with any investigational drug within the 30 days prior to enrolment - Enrolment of the study investigators, their family members, employees and other closely related or dependent persons Intervention and comparator: Patients randomized to the experimental arm will receive conestat alfa in addition to standard of care (SOC). Conestat alfa (8400 U followed by 4200 U every 8 hours) will be administered as a slow intravenous injection (5-10 minutes) over a 72-hour period (i.e. 9 administrations in total). The first conestat alfa treatment will be administered on the day of enrolment. The control group will receive SOC only. SOC treatment will be administered according to local institutional guidelines, including supplemental oxygen, antibiotics, corticosteroids, remdesivir, and anticoagulation. Main outcomes: The primary endpoint of this trial is disease severity on day 7 after enrolment assessed by an adapted WHO Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (score 0 will be omitted and score 6 and 7 will be combined) from 1 (no limitation of activities) to 7 (death). Secondary outcomes include (i) the time to clinical improvement (time from randomization to an improvement of two points on the WHO ordinal scale or discharge from hospital) within 14 days after enrolment, (ii) the proportion of participants alive and not having required invasive or non-invasive ventilation at 14 days after enrolment and (iii) the proportion of subjects without an acute lung injury (defined by PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio of ≤300mmHg) within 14 days after enrolment. Exploratory outcomes include virological clearance, C1 esterase inhibitor pharmacokinetics and changes in routine laboratory parameters and inflammatory proteins. Randomisation: Subjects will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio to treatment with conestat alfa in addition to SOC or SOC only. Randomization is performed via an interactive web response system (SecuTrial®). Blinding (masking): In this open-label trial, participants, caregivers and outcome assessors are not blinded to group assignment. Numbers to be randomised (sample size): We will randomise approximately 120 individuals (80 in the active treatment arm, 40 in the SOC group). Two interim analyses after 40 and 80 patients are planned according to the Pocock adjusted levels α_p = 0.0221. The results of the interim analysis will allow adjustment of the sample size (Lehmacher, Wassmer, 1999). Trial Status: PROTECT-COVID-19 protocol version 3.0 (July 07 2020). Participant recruitment started on July 30 2020 in one center (Basel, Switzerland, first participant included on August 06 2020). In four of five study centers patients are actively recruited. Participation of the fifth study center (Mexico) is anticipated by mid December 2020. Completion of trial recruitment depends on the development of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, number: NCT04414631, registered on 4 June 2020 Full protocol: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients. The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance. The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria. An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

In the last three decades, Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has increased in incidence and severity in many countries worldwide. The increase in CDI incidence has been particularly apparent among surgical patients. Therefore, prevention of CDI and optimization of management in the surgical patient are paramount. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of this infection.

Introduction: Infections caused by the opportunistic Stenotrophomonas maltophilia pathogen in immunocompromised patients are complicated to treat due to antibiotic resistance and the ability of the bacteria to produce biofilm. Areas covered: A MEDLINE/PubMed search was performed of available literature to describe the role of biofilm produced by S. maltophilia in the diseases it causes, including biofilm-influencing factors, the biofilm forming process and composition. The antimicrobial resistance due to S. maltophilia biofilm production and current antibiofilm strategies is also included. Expert opinion: Through the production of biofilm, S. maltophilia strains can easily adhere to the surfaces in hospital settings and aid in its transmission. The biofilm can also cause antibiotic tolerance rendering some of the therapeutic options ineffective, causing setbacks in the selection of an appropriate treatment. Conventional susceptibility tests do not yet offer therapeutic guidelines to treat biofilm-associated infections. Current S. maltophilia biofilm control strategies include natural and synthetic compounds, chelating agents, and commonly prescribed antibiotics. As biofilm age and matrix composition affect the level of antibiotic tolerance, their characterization should be included in biofilm susceptibility testing, in addition to molecular and proteomic analyses. As for now, several commonly recommended antibiotics can be used to treat biofilm-related S. maltophilia infections.

Aim: This study aims to assess the changes in antimicrobial resistance among some critical and high-priority microorganisms collected previously and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Mexico. Methods: We collected antimicrobial susceptibility data for critical and high-priority microorganisms from blood, urine, respiratory samples, and from all specimens, in which the pathogen may be considered a causative agent. Data were stratified and compared for two periods: 2019 versus 2020 and second semester 2019 (prepandemic) versus the second semester 2020 (pandemic). Results: In the analysis of second semester 2019 versus the second semester 2020, in blood samples, increased resistance to oxacillin (15.2% vs. 36.9%), erythromycin (25.7% vs. 42.8%), and clindamycin (24.8% vs. 43.3%) ( p ≤ 0.01) was detected for Staphylococcus aureus , to imipenem (13% vs. 23.4%) and meropenem (11.2% vs. 21.4) ( p ≤ 0.01), for Klebsiella pneumoniae . In all specimens, increased ampicillin and tetracycline resistance was detected for Enterococcus faecium ( p ≤ 0.01). In cefepime, meropenem, levofloxacin, and gentamicin ( p ≤ 0.01), resistance was detected for Escherichia coli ; and in piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, imipenem, meropenem, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and gentamicin ( p ≤ 0.01), resistance was detected for Pseudomonas aeruginosa . Conclusion: Antimicrobial resistance increased in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic. The increase in oxacillin resistance for S. aureus and carbapenem resistance for K. pneumoniae recovered from blood specimens deserves special attention. In addition, an increase in erythromycin resistance in S. aureus was detected, which may be associated with high azithromycin use. In general, for Acinetobacter baumannii and P. aeruginosa , increasing resistance rates were detected.

Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4–6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p < 0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). The survey showed a heterogeneous organization of ASPs worldwide, demonstrating the necessity of a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in the battle against antimicrobial resistance in surgical infections, and the importance of educational efforts towards this goal.