Background: Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) is elevated early in injured brain after traumatic brain injury (TBI), in humans and in animals. Etanercept (a TNF-α antagonist with anti-inflammatory effects) attenuates TBI in rats by reducing both microglial and astrocytic activation and increased serum levels of TNF-α. However, it is not known whether etanercept improves outcomes of TBI by attenuating microglia-associated, astrocytes-associated, and/or neurons-associated TNF-α expression in ischemic brain. A well clinically relevant rat model, where a lateral fluid percussion is combined with systemic administration of etanercept immediately after TBI, was used. The neurological severity score and motor function was measured on all rats preinjury and on day 3 after etanercept administration. At the same time, the neuronal and glial production of TNF-α was measured by Immunofluorescence staining. In addition, TNFα contents of ischemic cerebral homogenates was measured using commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits. Results: In addition to inducing brain ischemia as well as neurological and motor deficits, TBI caused significantly higher numbers of microglia-TNF-α double positive cells, but not neurons-TNF-α or astrocytes-TNF-α double positive cells in the injured brain areas than did the sham operated controls, when evaluated 3 days after TBI. The TBI-induced cerebral ischemia, neurological motor deficits, and increased numbers of microglia-TNF-α double positive cells and increased TNF-α levels in the injured brain were all significantly attenuated by etanercept therapy. Conclusion: This finding indicates that early microglia overproduction of TNF-α in the injured brain region after TBI contributes to cerebral ischemia and neurological motor deficits, which can be attenuated by etanercept therapy. Studies in this model could provide insight into the mechanisms underlying neurological motor disturbance in brain-injured patients.

Background: Successful weaning from mechanical ventilation is important for patients in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim was to construct neural networks to predict successful extubation in ventilated patients in ICUs. Methods: Data from 1 December 2009 through 31 December 2011 of 3602 patients with planned extubation in Chi-Mei Medical Center’s ICUs was used to train and test an artificial neural network (ANN). The input was 37 clinical risk factors, and the output was a failed extubation prediction. Results: One hundred eighty-five patients (5.1%) had a failed extubation. Multivariate analyses revealed that failure was positively associated with therapeutic intervention scoring system (TISS) scores (odds ratio [OR]: 1.814; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.283–2.563), chronic hemodialysis (OR: 12.264; 95% CI: 8.556–17.580), rapid shallow breathing (RSI) (OR: 2.003; 95% CI: 1.378–2.910), and pre-extubation heart rate (OR: 1.705; 95% CI: 1.173–2.480), but negatively associated with pre-extubation PaO₂/FiO₂ (OR: 0.529; 95%: 0.370–0.750) and maximum expiratory pressure (MEP) (OR: 0.610; 95% CI: 0.413–0.899). A multilayer perceptron ANN model with 19 neurons in a hidden layer was developed. The overall performance of this model was F₁: 0.867, precision: 0.939, and recall: 0.822. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.85, which is better than any one of the following predictors: TISS: 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54–0.62; p < 0.001); 0.58 (95% CI: 0.53–0.62; p < 0.001); and RSI: 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49–0.58; p = 0.097). Conclusions: The ANN performed well when predicting failed extubation, and it will help predict successful planned extubation.

This study is conducted to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with bacteremia caused by Aeromonas species. Patients with bacteremia caused by Aeromonas species during the period 2009 to 2013 were identified from a computerized database of a regional hospital in southern Taiwan. The medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 91 patients with bacteremia due to Aeromonas species were identified. In addition to 16 (17.6%) primary bacteremia, the most common source of secondary infection is peritonitis (n = 27, 29.7%), followed by biliary tract infection (n = 18, 19.8%), and SSTI (n = 12, 13.2%), pneumonia (n = 9, 9.9%), catheter-related bloodstream infection (n = 5, 5.5%), and genitourinary tract infection (n = 4, 4.4%). A. hydrophila (n = 35, 38.5%) was the most common pathogen, followed by A. veronii biovar sobria (n = 31, 34.1%), A. caviae (n = 14, 15.4%), and A. veronii biovar veronii (n = 9, 9.9%). Forty-three (47.3%) patients were classified as healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) causes by Aeromonas species, and patients with HCAI were more likely to have cancer, and receive immunosuppressant than patients with community-acquired bacteremia. The overall outcomes, including rate of ICU admission, acute respiratory failure, and mortality were 33.3%, 28.6%, and 23.1%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that the in-hospital day mortality was significantly associated only with underlying cancer (P <.001), and initial shock (P <.001). Aeromonas species should be considered one of the causative pathogens of healthcare-associated bacteremia, especially in immunocompromised patients. In addition, it can be associated with high fatality. Cancer and initial shock were the poor prognostic factors.

The outbreak of COVID-19 has significantly changed the epidemiology of respiratory tract infection in several ways. The implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) including universal masking, hand hygiene, and social distancing not only resulted in a decline in reported SARS-CoV-2 cases but also contributed to the decline in the non-COVID-19 respiratory tract infection-related hospital utilization. Moreover, it also led to the decreased incidence of previous commonly encountered respiratory pathogens, such as influenza and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Although antimicrobial agents are essential for treating patients with COVID-19 co-infection, the prescribing of antibiotics was significantly higher than the estimated prevalence of bacterial co-infection, which indicated the overuse of antibiotics or unnecessary antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, inappropriate antimicrobial exposure may drive the selection of drug-resistant microorganisms, and the disruption of infection control in COVID-19 setting measures may result in the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). In conclusion, NPIs could be effective in preventing respiratory tract infection and changing the microbiologic distribution of respiratory pathogens; however, we should continue with epidemiological surveillance to establish updated information, antimicrobial stewardship programs for appropriate use of antibiotic, and infection control prevention interventions to prevent the spread of MDROs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study was conducted to investigate the clinical significance, manifestations, microbiological characteristics and outcomes of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) isolates, and compare the clinical features of community- and healthcare-acquired CRE isolates. A total of 78 patients were identified to have CRE. Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most common pathogens (n = 42, 53.8%), followed by Enterobacter cloacae (n = 24, 30.8%), and Escherichia coli (n = 11, 14.1%). Most of the patients acquired CRE from healthcare settings (n = 55, 70.5%), and other cases got CRE from community settings (n = 23, 29.5%). Nine cases (11.5%) were classified as CRE colonization. Among the remaining 69 cases of CRE infections, pneumonia (n = 28, 40.6%) was the most common type of infections, followed by urinary tract infection (n = 24, 34.8%), and intra-abdominal infection (n = 16, 23.2%). The patients acquired CRE from community settings were more likely to be elderly, female, and had more urinary tract infections than from healthcare settings. In contrast, the patients acquired CRE from healthcare settings had more intra-abdominal infections, intra-abdominal surgery, and presence of indwelling device than from community settings. In conclusion, community-acquired CRE are not rare, and their associated clinical presentations are different from healthcare-acquired CRE.

This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of tedizolid, compared to linezolid, in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI). PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO (Elton B. Stephens Co.), Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline and Embase databases were accessed until 18 July 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tedizolid with linezolid for adult patients with ABSSSIs were included. The outcomes included the clinical response, microbiological response, and risk of adverse events (AEs). A total of four RCTs involving 2056 adult patients with ABSSSI were enrolled. The early clinical response rate was 79.6% and 80.5% for patients receiving tedizolid and linezolid, respectively. The pooled analysis showed that tedizolid had a non-inferior early clinical response rate to linezolid (odds ratio (OR) = 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.77–1.19, I² = 0%). The early response rate was similar between tedizolid and linezolid among patients with cellulitis/erysipelas (75.1% vs. 77.1%; OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.64–1.27, I² = 25%), major cutaneous abscess (85.1% vs. 86.8%; OR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.42–2.03, I² = 37%) and wound infection (85.9% vs. 82.6%; OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.66–2.51, I² = 45%). For methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus patients, tedizolid had a favorable microbiological response rate of 95.2% which was comparable to linezolid (94%) (OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.49–2.90, I² = 0%). In addition to the similar risk of treatment-emergent AEs (a serious event, the discontinuation of the study drug due to AEs and mortality between tedizolid and linezolid), tedizolid was associated with a lower risk of nausea, vomiting and abnormal neutrophil count than linezolid. In conclusion, once-daily tedizolid (200 mg for six days) compared to linezolid (600 mg twice-daily for 10 days) was non-inferior in efficacy in the treatment of ABSSSI. Besides, tedizolid was generally as well tolerated as linezolid, and had a lower incidence of gastrointestinal AEs and bone marrow suppression than linezolid.