User login
Drug combo indicated for bacterial pneumonia
(Avycaz) to include hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in adults.
Specifically, the approved indication is for infections caused by certain Gram-negative bacteria – some of which are increasingly resistant to available antibiotics – including, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter cloacae, Escherichia coli, Serratia marcescens, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae.
There have not been new treatment options for HABP/VABP caused by Gram-negative bacteria in more than 15 years, according to Allergan, the drug’s manufacturer.
This is the third approved indication for ceftazidime/avibactam; the other two indications are for complicated intra-abdominal infections (in combination with metronidazole) and for complicated urinary tract infections.
(Avycaz) to include hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in adults.
Specifically, the approved indication is for infections caused by certain Gram-negative bacteria – some of which are increasingly resistant to available antibiotics – including, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter cloacae, Escherichia coli, Serratia marcescens, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae.
There have not been new treatment options for HABP/VABP caused by Gram-negative bacteria in more than 15 years, according to Allergan, the drug’s manufacturer.
This is the third approved indication for ceftazidime/avibactam; the other two indications are for complicated intra-abdominal infections (in combination with metronidazole) and for complicated urinary tract infections.
(Avycaz) to include hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in adults.
Specifically, the approved indication is for infections caused by certain Gram-negative bacteria – some of which are increasingly resistant to available antibiotics – including, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter cloacae, Escherichia coli, Serratia marcescens, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae.
There have not been new treatment options for HABP/VABP caused by Gram-negative bacteria in more than 15 years, according to Allergan, the drug’s manufacturer.
This is the third approved indication for ceftazidime/avibactam; the other two indications are for complicated intra-abdominal infections (in combination with metronidazole) and for complicated urinary tract infections.
Preop physiotherapy training reduces risk of postop pulmonary complications
A single 30-minute coaching session with a physiotherapist within 6 weeks of major upper abdominal surgery significantly reduced postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), according to the results of a prospective trial.
Ianthe Boden and her colleagues recruited 441 eligible adults scheduled for elective major upper abdominal surgery to participate in the prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, controlled superiority study to assess whether PPC outcomes were affected by preoperative physiotherapy. Consecutive participants were obtained from outpatient preadmission assessment clinics during June 2013 to August 2015; they were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the control (219) or intervention (222) groups. The median patient age was 68 years for the control and 63 for the intervention group, and each group was composed of 31% women.
Immediately after receiving the booklets, however, participants in the intervention group were also given an added 30-minute education and training session by preoperative physiotherapists. This instruction covered factors contributing to PPC occurrence, strategies to help prevention it, and three coached repetitions of breathing exercises. Emphasis was placed on initiating prescribed breathing exercises upon regaining postoperative consciousness and continuing them every hour until the patients were fully ambulatory.
The primary outcome was evaluated by masked assessors using the Melbourne group score criteria to determine PPC incidence within 14 postoperative days or by the time of hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Nine participants, 4 from the intervention and 5 from the control group, withdrew from the study. Of the total remaining 432 participants, 85 (20%) had a documented PPC incident, including hospital acquired pneumonia, within the specified postoperative time frame, as reported in the BMJ.
Results showed that the physiotherapy group had significantly fewer PPC occurrences (27/218, 12%) than did the control group (58/214, 27%). The calculated absolute risk reduction was 15% (P less than .001). Adjustment for three of the prespecified covariates (age, respiratory comorbidity, and surgical procedure) showed PPC incidence remained halved (hazard ratio, 0.48; P = .001) for the intervention group with a number needed to treat of 7 (95% confidence interval, 5-14).
Secondary outcomes included incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, hospital utilization, mobility, patient reported complications at 6 weeks, and mortality rates in hospital, at 6 weeks, and at 12 months. For secondary outcomes in the adjusted analysis, incidences of pneumonia were halved in the physiotherapy intervention group with a number needed to treat of 9 (95% CI, 6-21). No significant differences in secondary outcomes were detected between the control and treatment groups.
Sensitivity analysis that removed participants who had lower abdominal and laparoscopic surgery strengthened both primary and secondary outcome results to favor the preoperative physiotherapy intervention for reducing PPC. The researchers found that, in an adjusted analysis of subgroup effects, there was a gradient in reduction of PPCs according to surgical category.
Shorter lengths hospital stay and lower all-cause 12-month mortality were also associated with more experienced physiotherapists providing the preoperative education and training.
Ms. Boden and her colleagues proposed that the timing for patients to begin breathing exercises after major open upper abdominal surgery could be critical in reducing PPC incidence. Initiating breathing exercises within the first 24 hours after surgery – in contrast to the common practice of waiting 1-2 days to begin postoperative physiotherapy – could prevent general anesthesia-associated mild atelectasis from developing into severe atelectasis and PPCs.
The researchers concluded that “in a general population of patients listed for elective upper abdominal surgery, a 30-minute preoperative physiotherapy session provided within existing hospital multidisciplinary preadmission clinics halves the incidence of PPCs and specifically hospital acquired pneumonia. Further research is required to investigate benefits to mortality and length of stay.”
The authors reported that they received grants from the Clifford Craig Foundation; the University of Tasmania (Hobart), Australia; and the Waitemata District Health Board in Auckland, New Zealand.
SOURCE: Boden I et al. BMJ. 2018. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j5916.
A single 30-minute coaching session with a physiotherapist within 6 weeks of major upper abdominal surgery significantly reduced postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), according to the results of a prospective trial.
Ianthe Boden and her colleagues recruited 441 eligible adults scheduled for elective major upper abdominal surgery to participate in the prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, controlled superiority study to assess whether PPC outcomes were affected by preoperative physiotherapy. Consecutive participants were obtained from outpatient preadmission assessment clinics during June 2013 to August 2015; they were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the control (219) or intervention (222) groups. The median patient age was 68 years for the control and 63 for the intervention group, and each group was composed of 31% women.
Immediately after receiving the booklets, however, participants in the intervention group were also given an added 30-minute education and training session by preoperative physiotherapists. This instruction covered factors contributing to PPC occurrence, strategies to help prevention it, and three coached repetitions of breathing exercises. Emphasis was placed on initiating prescribed breathing exercises upon regaining postoperative consciousness and continuing them every hour until the patients were fully ambulatory.
The primary outcome was evaluated by masked assessors using the Melbourne group score criteria to determine PPC incidence within 14 postoperative days or by the time of hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Nine participants, 4 from the intervention and 5 from the control group, withdrew from the study. Of the total remaining 432 participants, 85 (20%) had a documented PPC incident, including hospital acquired pneumonia, within the specified postoperative time frame, as reported in the BMJ.
Results showed that the physiotherapy group had significantly fewer PPC occurrences (27/218, 12%) than did the control group (58/214, 27%). The calculated absolute risk reduction was 15% (P less than .001). Adjustment for three of the prespecified covariates (age, respiratory comorbidity, and surgical procedure) showed PPC incidence remained halved (hazard ratio, 0.48; P = .001) for the intervention group with a number needed to treat of 7 (95% confidence interval, 5-14).
Secondary outcomes included incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, hospital utilization, mobility, patient reported complications at 6 weeks, and mortality rates in hospital, at 6 weeks, and at 12 months. For secondary outcomes in the adjusted analysis, incidences of pneumonia were halved in the physiotherapy intervention group with a number needed to treat of 9 (95% CI, 6-21). No significant differences in secondary outcomes were detected between the control and treatment groups.
Sensitivity analysis that removed participants who had lower abdominal and laparoscopic surgery strengthened both primary and secondary outcome results to favor the preoperative physiotherapy intervention for reducing PPC. The researchers found that, in an adjusted analysis of subgroup effects, there was a gradient in reduction of PPCs according to surgical category.
Shorter lengths hospital stay and lower all-cause 12-month mortality were also associated with more experienced physiotherapists providing the preoperative education and training.
Ms. Boden and her colleagues proposed that the timing for patients to begin breathing exercises after major open upper abdominal surgery could be critical in reducing PPC incidence. Initiating breathing exercises within the first 24 hours after surgery – in contrast to the common practice of waiting 1-2 days to begin postoperative physiotherapy – could prevent general anesthesia-associated mild atelectasis from developing into severe atelectasis and PPCs.
The researchers concluded that “in a general population of patients listed for elective upper abdominal surgery, a 30-minute preoperative physiotherapy session provided within existing hospital multidisciplinary preadmission clinics halves the incidence of PPCs and specifically hospital acquired pneumonia. Further research is required to investigate benefits to mortality and length of stay.”
The authors reported that they received grants from the Clifford Craig Foundation; the University of Tasmania (Hobart), Australia; and the Waitemata District Health Board in Auckland, New Zealand.
SOURCE: Boden I et al. BMJ. 2018. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j5916.
A single 30-minute coaching session with a physiotherapist within 6 weeks of major upper abdominal surgery significantly reduced postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), according to the results of a prospective trial.
Ianthe Boden and her colleagues recruited 441 eligible adults scheduled for elective major upper abdominal surgery to participate in the prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, controlled superiority study to assess whether PPC outcomes were affected by preoperative physiotherapy. Consecutive participants were obtained from outpatient preadmission assessment clinics during June 2013 to August 2015; they were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the control (219) or intervention (222) groups. The median patient age was 68 years for the control and 63 for the intervention group, and each group was composed of 31% women.
Immediately after receiving the booklets, however, participants in the intervention group were also given an added 30-minute education and training session by preoperative physiotherapists. This instruction covered factors contributing to PPC occurrence, strategies to help prevention it, and three coached repetitions of breathing exercises. Emphasis was placed on initiating prescribed breathing exercises upon regaining postoperative consciousness and continuing them every hour until the patients were fully ambulatory.
The primary outcome was evaluated by masked assessors using the Melbourne group score criteria to determine PPC incidence within 14 postoperative days or by the time of hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Nine participants, 4 from the intervention and 5 from the control group, withdrew from the study. Of the total remaining 432 participants, 85 (20%) had a documented PPC incident, including hospital acquired pneumonia, within the specified postoperative time frame, as reported in the BMJ.
Results showed that the physiotherapy group had significantly fewer PPC occurrences (27/218, 12%) than did the control group (58/214, 27%). The calculated absolute risk reduction was 15% (P less than .001). Adjustment for three of the prespecified covariates (age, respiratory comorbidity, and surgical procedure) showed PPC incidence remained halved (hazard ratio, 0.48; P = .001) for the intervention group with a number needed to treat of 7 (95% confidence interval, 5-14).
Secondary outcomes included incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, hospital utilization, mobility, patient reported complications at 6 weeks, and mortality rates in hospital, at 6 weeks, and at 12 months. For secondary outcomes in the adjusted analysis, incidences of pneumonia were halved in the physiotherapy intervention group with a number needed to treat of 9 (95% CI, 6-21). No significant differences in secondary outcomes were detected between the control and treatment groups.
Sensitivity analysis that removed participants who had lower abdominal and laparoscopic surgery strengthened both primary and secondary outcome results to favor the preoperative physiotherapy intervention for reducing PPC. The researchers found that, in an adjusted analysis of subgroup effects, there was a gradient in reduction of PPCs according to surgical category.
Shorter lengths hospital stay and lower all-cause 12-month mortality were also associated with more experienced physiotherapists providing the preoperative education and training.
Ms. Boden and her colleagues proposed that the timing for patients to begin breathing exercises after major open upper abdominal surgery could be critical in reducing PPC incidence. Initiating breathing exercises within the first 24 hours after surgery – in contrast to the common practice of waiting 1-2 days to begin postoperative physiotherapy – could prevent general anesthesia-associated mild atelectasis from developing into severe atelectasis and PPCs.
The researchers concluded that “in a general population of patients listed for elective upper abdominal surgery, a 30-minute preoperative physiotherapy session provided within existing hospital multidisciplinary preadmission clinics halves the incidence of PPCs and specifically hospital acquired pneumonia. Further research is required to investigate benefits to mortality and length of stay.”
The authors reported that they received grants from the Clifford Craig Foundation; the University of Tasmania (Hobart), Australia; and the Waitemata District Health Board in Auckland, New Zealand.
SOURCE: Boden I et al. BMJ. 2018. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j5916.
FROM THE BMJ
Key clinical point: Reduction in PPC incidences corresponded to physiotherapists providing preoperative education and coaching intervention.
Major finding: Compared with the control group, Absolute risk was reduced by 15%, and seven was determined as number needed to treat.
Study details: Prospective, blinded study of 441 adult participants randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio, comparing PPC outcomes associated with preop practices for upper abdominal surgeries.
Disclosures: The authors reported that they received grants from the Clifford Craig Foundation; the University of Tasmania (Hobart), Australia; and the Waitemata District Health Board in Auckland, New Zealand.
Source: Boden I. et al. BMJ. 2018. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j5916.
Predicting MDR Gram-negative infection mortality risk
Source control, defined as location and elimination of the source of the infection, was critical for patient survival in the case of multidrug resistant bacterial infection, according to the results of a case-control study of 62 critically ill surgical patients who were assessed between 2011 and 2014.
Researchers examined the characteristics of infected patients surviving to hospital discharge compared with those of nonsurvivors to look for predictive factors. Demographically, patients had an overall mean age of 62 years; 30.6% were women; 69.4% were white. The first culture obtained during a surgical ICU admission that grew a carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa, or MDR Acinetobacter spp. was defined as the index culture.
“In this study, 33.9% [21/62] of critically ill surgical patients with a culture positive for MDR Gram-negative bacteria died prior to hospital discharge,” according to Andrew S. Jarrell, PharmD, of the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, and his colleagues.
With multivariate logistic regression, achievement of source control was the only variable associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.003-0.52); P = .01).
“Source control status was predictive of in-hospital mortality after controlling for other factors. Specifically, the odds of in-hospital mortality were 97% lower when source control was achieved as compared to when source control was not achieved,” the authors stated (J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6).
Scenarios in which source control was not applicable (pneumonia and urinary tract infection) were also similarly distributed between survivors and nonsurvivors, they reported.
Other than source control, the only significant risk factors for mortality, as seen in univariate analysis, all occurred prior to index culture. They were: vasopressor use (46.3% of survivors, vs. 76.2% of nonsurvivors, P = .03); mechanical ventilation (63.4% vs. 100%, P = .001); and median ICU length of stay (10 days vs. 18 days, P = .001).
“Achievement of source control stands out as a critical factor for patient survival. Clinicians should take this, along with prior ICU LOS, vasopressor use, and mechanical ventilation status, into consideration when evaluating patient prognosis,” Dr. Jarrell and his colleagues concluded.
The authors reported that they had no conflicts or source of funding.
Source: Jarrell, A.S., et al. J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6.
Source control, defined as location and elimination of the source of the infection, was critical for patient survival in the case of multidrug resistant bacterial infection, according to the results of a case-control study of 62 critically ill surgical patients who were assessed between 2011 and 2014.
Researchers examined the characteristics of infected patients surviving to hospital discharge compared with those of nonsurvivors to look for predictive factors. Demographically, patients had an overall mean age of 62 years; 30.6% were women; 69.4% were white. The first culture obtained during a surgical ICU admission that grew a carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa, or MDR Acinetobacter spp. was defined as the index culture.
“In this study, 33.9% [21/62] of critically ill surgical patients with a culture positive for MDR Gram-negative bacteria died prior to hospital discharge,” according to Andrew S. Jarrell, PharmD, of the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, and his colleagues.
With multivariate logistic regression, achievement of source control was the only variable associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.003-0.52); P = .01).
“Source control status was predictive of in-hospital mortality after controlling for other factors. Specifically, the odds of in-hospital mortality were 97% lower when source control was achieved as compared to when source control was not achieved,” the authors stated (J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6).
Scenarios in which source control was not applicable (pneumonia and urinary tract infection) were also similarly distributed between survivors and nonsurvivors, they reported.
Other than source control, the only significant risk factors for mortality, as seen in univariate analysis, all occurred prior to index culture. They were: vasopressor use (46.3% of survivors, vs. 76.2% of nonsurvivors, P = .03); mechanical ventilation (63.4% vs. 100%, P = .001); and median ICU length of stay (10 days vs. 18 days, P = .001).
“Achievement of source control stands out as a critical factor for patient survival. Clinicians should take this, along with prior ICU LOS, vasopressor use, and mechanical ventilation status, into consideration when evaluating patient prognosis,” Dr. Jarrell and his colleagues concluded.
The authors reported that they had no conflicts or source of funding.
Source: Jarrell, A.S., et al. J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6.
Source control, defined as location and elimination of the source of the infection, was critical for patient survival in the case of multidrug resistant bacterial infection, according to the results of a case-control study of 62 critically ill surgical patients who were assessed between 2011 and 2014.
Researchers examined the characteristics of infected patients surviving to hospital discharge compared with those of nonsurvivors to look for predictive factors. Demographically, patients had an overall mean age of 62 years; 30.6% were women; 69.4% were white. The first culture obtained during a surgical ICU admission that grew a carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa, or MDR Acinetobacter spp. was defined as the index culture.
“In this study, 33.9% [21/62] of critically ill surgical patients with a culture positive for MDR Gram-negative bacteria died prior to hospital discharge,” according to Andrew S. Jarrell, PharmD, of the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, and his colleagues.
With multivariate logistic regression, achievement of source control was the only variable associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.003-0.52); P = .01).
“Source control status was predictive of in-hospital mortality after controlling for other factors. Specifically, the odds of in-hospital mortality were 97% lower when source control was achieved as compared to when source control was not achieved,” the authors stated (J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6).
Scenarios in which source control was not applicable (pneumonia and urinary tract infection) were also similarly distributed between survivors and nonsurvivors, they reported.
Other than source control, the only significant risk factors for mortality, as seen in univariate analysis, all occurred prior to index culture. They were: vasopressor use (46.3% of survivors, vs. 76.2% of nonsurvivors, P = .03); mechanical ventilation (63.4% vs. 100%, P = .001); and median ICU length of stay (10 days vs. 18 days, P = .001).
“Achievement of source control stands out as a critical factor for patient survival. Clinicians should take this, along with prior ICU LOS, vasopressor use, and mechanical ventilation status, into consideration when evaluating patient prognosis,” Dr. Jarrell and his colleagues concluded.
The authors reported that they had no conflicts or source of funding.
Source: Jarrell, A.S., et al. J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Key clinical point: Source control was the most important predictor of MDR Gram-negative infection mortality in hospitalized patients.
Major finding: The odds of in-hospital mortality were 97% lower when source control was achieved.
Study details: Case-control study of 62 critically ill surgical patients from 2011 to 2014 who had an MDR infection.
Disclosures: The authors reported that they had no conflicts or source of funding.
Source: Jarrell, A.S., et al. J Crit Care. 2018;43:321-6.
PPIs, certain antibiotics increase risk of hospital onset C. difficile infection
The use of proton pump inhibitors increased the odds of a patient having hospital-onset Clostridium difficile infection (HO CDI) as did the use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, carbapenems, and piperacillin/tazobactam, according to the results of a retrospective database study of more than 1 million patients at 150 U.S. hospitals.
PPIs increased the odds of HO CDI by 44% (P less than .001), whereas the use of H2 antagonists increased the odds ratio for HO CDI to a lesser, but still significant, extent (13% increase, P less than .001), according to the report published online in Clinical Infectious Diseases.
Overall, the odds of HO CDI were significantly higher in patients taking carbapenems, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, metronidazole, and piperacillin/tazobactam, as well as patients on multiple antibiotics. However, treatment with tetracyclines, macrolides, or clindamycin significantly reduced the odds of HO CDI.
The combination of PPIs with fluoroquinolones, third-generation cephalosporins, fourth-generation cephalosporins, clindamycin, or carbapenems did not significantly alter the odds of HO CDI, which was in contrast with a previous meta-analysis (Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107[7]:1011-9).
In addition to the drug associations, the odds of a patient having HO CDI increased by 0.5% for each year in age. The odds of CDI in women was 1.2 times as likely as in men, and admission from a long-term care facility, the presence of the comorbidities of diabetes, Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis, as well as days in the ICU and antibiotic days of therapy all significantly increased the odds of a patient having HO CDI. (Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112).
“The results support the need for stewardship practices around both high-risk antibiotics and medications that alter gastric acid regulation. Furthermore, the impact of deprescribing acid suppression therapy coupled with antibiotic stewardship could greatly reduce the incidence of HO CDI,” the researchers concluded.
The authors reported that they had no conflicts or funding source for this work.
SOURCE: Watson, T. et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112.
The use of proton pump inhibitors increased the odds of a patient having hospital-onset Clostridium difficile infection (HO CDI) as did the use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, carbapenems, and piperacillin/tazobactam, according to the results of a retrospective database study of more than 1 million patients at 150 U.S. hospitals.
PPIs increased the odds of HO CDI by 44% (P less than .001), whereas the use of H2 antagonists increased the odds ratio for HO CDI to a lesser, but still significant, extent (13% increase, P less than .001), according to the report published online in Clinical Infectious Diseases.
Overall, the odds of HO CDI were significantly higher in patients taking carbapenems, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, metronidazole, and piperacillin/tazobactam, as well as patients on multiple antibiotics. However, treatment with tetracyclines, macrolides, or clindamycin significantly reduced the odds of HO CDI.
The combination of PPIs with fluoroquinolones, third-generation cephalosporins, fourth-generation cephalosporins, clindamycin, or carbapenems did not significantly alter the odds of HO CDI, which was in contrast with a previous meta-analysis (Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107[7]:1011-9).
In addition to the drug associations, the odds of a patient having HO CDI increased by 0.5% for each year in age. The odds of CDI in women was 1.2 times as likely as in men, and admission from a long-term care facility, the presence of the comorbidities of diabetes, Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis, as well as days in the ICU and antibiotic days of therapy all significantly increased the odds of a patient having HO CDI. (Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112).
“The results support the need for stewardship practices around both high-risk antibiotics and medications that alter gastric acid regulation. Furthermore, the impact of deprescribing acid suppression therapy coupled with antibiotic stewardship could greatly reduce the incidence of HO CDI,” the researchers concluded.
The authors reported that they had no conflicts or funding source for this work.
SOURCE: Watson, T. et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112.
The use of proton pump inhibitors increased the odds of a patient having hospital-onset Clostridium difficile infection (HO CDI) as did the use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, carbapenems, and piperacillin/tazobactam, according to the results of a retrospective database study of more than 1 million patients at 150 U.S. hospitals.
PPIs increased the odds of HO CDI by 44% (P less than .001), whereas the use of H2 antagonists increased the odds ratio for HO CDI to a lesser, but still significant, extent (13% increase, P less than .001), according to the report published online in Clinical Infectious Diseases.
Overall, the odds of HO CDI were significantly higher in patients taking carbapenems, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, metronidazole, and piperacillin/tazobactam, as well as patients on multiple antibiotics. However, treatment with tetracyclines, macrolides, or clindamycin significantly reduced the odds of HO CDI.
The combination of PPIs with fluoroquinolones, third-generation cephalosporins, fourth-generation cephalosporins, clindamycin, or carbapenems did not significantly alter the odds of HO CDI, which was in contrast with a previous meta-analysis (Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107[7]:1011-9).
In addition to the drug associations, the odds of a patient having HO CDI increased by 0.5% for each year in age. The odds of CDI in women was 1.2 times as likely as in men, and admission from a long-term care facility, the presence of the comorbidities of diabetes, Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis, as well as days in the ICU and antibiotic days of therapy all significantly increased the odds of a patient having HO CDI. (Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112).
“The results support the need for stewardship practices around both high-risk antibiotics and medications that alter gastric acid regulation. Furthermore, the impact of deprescribing acid suppression therapy coupled with antibiotic stewardship could greatly reduce the incidence of HO CDI,” the researchers concluded.
The authors reported that they had no conflicts or funding source for this work.
SOURCE: Watson, T. et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112.
FROM CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Key clinical point: Proper stewardship of PPIs, antibiotics might lower risk of hospital-onset C. difficile infection.
Major finding: Patients taking PPIs had a 44% increased risk of developing hospital-onset C. difficile infection.
Study details: Retrospective database study of more than 1 million patients at 150 U.S. hospitals.
Disclosures: The authors reported that they had no conflicts or funding source for this work.
Source: Watson, T. et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Dec. 20. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1112.
Type of headwear worn during surgery had no impact on SSI rates
SAN DIEGO – Surgeon preference for bouffant versus skull caps does not significantly impact superficial surgical site infection rates after accounting for surgical procedure type, results from a an analysis of a previously randomized, prospective trial showed.
“We are all aware of the current battle that is taking place over operating room attire based on the differences between the AORN [Association of periOperative Nurses] recommendations and ACS guidelines,” lead study author Shanu N. Kothari, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
In 2016, Dr. Kothari, director of minimally invasive bariatric surgery at Gundersen Health System, La Crosse, Wisc., and his associates published results from a prospective, randomized non-inferiority trial on the impact of hair removal on surgical site infection rates (J Am Coll Surg 2016;223[5]:704-11). Patients were grouped by the attending surgeons’ preferred cap choice into either bouffant or skull cap groups. Their analysis concluded that hair left on the abdomen had no impact on surgical site infection rates. “What is unique about this study is that two independent certified research nurses independently assessed every wound in that trial,” he said.
For the current study, the researchers re-examined the data by conducting a multivariate analysis to determine the influence of surgical cap choice on SSIs. Overall, 1,543 patients were included in the trial. Attending surgeons wore bouffant caps and skull caps in 39% and 61% of cases, respectively. Bouffant caps were used in 71% of colon/intestine, 42% of hernia/other, 40% of biliary cases and only 1% of foregut cases. Overall, SSIs occurred in 8% and 5% of cases in which attending surgeons wore a bouffant and skull cap, respectively (P = .016), with 6% vs. 4% classified as superficial (P = .041), 0.8% vs. 0.2% deep (P = .120), and 1% vs. 0.9% organ space (P = .790). However, when the researchers adjusted for the type of surgery and surgical approach (laparoscopic vs. open), they observed no difference in SSI rates for skull cap, compared with bouffant cap.
“Surgeon preference should dictate the choice of headwear in the operating room,” Dr. Kothari commented. “What I would encourage is perhaps a summit between thought leaders in the ACS and the AORN, [to conduct] a true review of evidence and come up with a universal guideline. There are many other issues we need to be focusing on in surgery, and this probably doesn’t have to be one of them.”
“In general, there is a complete and utter absence of any scientific evidence whatsoever for most of the things we are told to do in terms of wearing what we do in the OR,” said invited discussant E. Patchen Dellinger, MD, FACS, FIDSA, professor of surgery at the University of Washington, Seattle. “In fact, there are prospective randomized trials showing that wearing a [face] mask does not reduce surgical site infection, although I’ve been wearing a mask in the OR for approximately 48 years.”
Dr. Kothari reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – Surgeon preference for bouffant versus skull caps does not significantly impact superficial surgical site infection rates after accounting for surgical procedure type, results from a an analysis of a previously randomized, prospective trial showed.
“We are all aware of the current battle that is taking place over operating room attire based on the differences between the AORN [Association of periOperative Nurses] recommendations and ACS guidelines,” lead study author Shanu N. Kothari, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
In 2016, Dr. Kothari, director of minimally invasive bariatric surgery at Gundersen Health System, La Crosse, Wisc., and his associates published results from a prospective, randomized non-inferiority trial on the impact of hair removal on surgical site infection rates (J Am Coll Surg 2016;223[5]:704-11). Patients were grouped by the attending surgeons’ preferred cap choice into either bouffant or skull cap groups. Their analysis concluded that hair left on the abdomen had no impact on surgical site infection rates. “What is unique about this study is that two independent certified research nurses independently assessed every wound in that trial,” he said.
For the current study, the researchers re-examined the data by conducting a multivariate analysis to determine the influence of surgical cap choice on SSIs. Overall, 1,543 patients were included in the trial. Attending surgeons wore bouffant caps and skull caps in 39% and 61% of cases, respectively. Bouffant caps were used in 71% of colon/intestine, 42% of hernia/other, 40% of biliary cases and only 1% of foregut cases. Overall, SSIs occurred in 8% and 5% of cases in which attending surgeons wore a bouffant and skull cap, respectively (P = .016), with 6% vs. 4% classified as superficial (P = .041), 0.8% vs. 0.2% deep (P = .120), and 1% vs. 0.9% organ space (P = .790). However, when the researchers adjusted for the type of surgery and surgical approach (laparoscopic vs. open), they observed no difference in SSI rates for skull cap, compared with bouffant cap.
“Surgeon preference should dictate the choice of headwear in the operating room,” Dr. Kothari commented. “What I would encourage is perhaps a summit between thought leaders in the ACS and the AORN, [to conduct] a true review of evidence and come up with a universal guideline. There are many other issues we need to be focusing on in surgery, and this probably doesn’t have to be one of them.”
“In general, there is a complete and utter absence of any scientific evidence whatsoever for most of the things we are told to do in terms of wearing what we do in the OR,” said invited discussant E. Patchen Dellinger, MD, FACS, FIDSA, professor of surgery at the University of Washington, Seattle. “In fact, there are prospective randomized trials showing that wearing a [face] mask does not reduce surgical site infection, although I’ve been wearing a mask in the OR for approximately 48 years.”
Dr. Kothari reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – Surgeon preference for bouffant versus skull caps does not significantly impact superficial surgical site infection rates after accounting for surgical procedure type, results from a an analysis of a previously randomized, prospective trial showed.
“We are all aware of the current battle that is taking place over operating room attire based on the differences between the AORN [Association of periOperative Nurses] recommendations and ACS guidelines,” lead study author Shanu N. Kothari, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
In 2016, Dr. Kothari, director of minimally invasive bariatric surgery at Gundersen Health System, La Crosse, Wisc., and his associates published results from a prospective, randomized non-inferiority trial on the impact of hair removal on surgical site infection rates (J Am Coll Surg 2016;223[5]:704-11). Patients were grouped by the attending surgeons’ preferred cap choice into either bouffant or skull cap groups. Their analysis concluded that hair left on the abdomen had no impact on surgical site infection rates. “What is unique about this study is that two independent certified research nurses independently assessed every wound in that trial,” he said.
For the current study, the researchers re-examined the data by conducting a multivariate analysis to determine the influence of surgical cap choice on SSIs. Overall, 1,543 patients were included in the trial. Attending surgeons wore bouffant caps and skull caps in 39% and 61% of cases, respectively. Bouffant caps were used in 71% of colon/intestine, 42% of hernia/other, 40% of biliary cases and only 1% of foregut cases. Overall, SSIs occurred in 8% and 5% of cases in which attending surgeons wore a bouffant and skull cap, respectively (P = .016), with 6% vs. 4% classified as superficial (P = .041), 0.8% vs. 0.2% deep (P = .120), and 1% vs. 0.9% organ space (P = .790). However, when the researchers adjusted for the type of surgery and surgical approach (laparoscopic vs. open), they observed no difference in SSI rates for skull cap, compared with bouffant cap.
“Surgeon preference should dictate the choice of headwear in the operating room,” Dr. Kothari commented. “What I would encourage is perhaps a summit between thought leaders in the ACS and the AORN, [to conduct] a true review of evidence and come up with a universal guideline. There are many other issues we need to be focusing on in surgery, and this probably doesn’t have to be one of them.”
“In general, there is a complete and utter absence of any scientific evidence whatsoever for most of the things we are told to do in terms of wearing what we do in the OR,” said invited discussant E. Patchen Dellinger, MD, FACS, FIDSA, professor of surgery at the University of Washington, Seattle. “In fact, there are prospective randomized trials showing that wearing a [face] mask does not reduce surgical site infection, although I’ve been wearing a mask in the OR for approximately 48 years.”
Dr. Kothari reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point: Surgeon preference should dictate choice of headwear in the OR.
Major finding: There was no significant difference in the rate of SSI, regardless of whether a skull cap or a bouffant cap was used during surgery.
Study details: Re-examination of a prospective, randomized non-inferiority trial of 1,543 patients, on the impact of hair removal on surgical site infection rates.
Disclosures: Dr. Kothari reporting having no relevant disclosures.
Strict OR attire policy had no impact on SSI rate
SAN DIEGO – Implementation of strict operating room (OR) attire policies did not reduce the rates of superficial surgical site infections (SSIs), according to an analysis of more than 6,500 patients.
“SSIs are the most common cause of health care–associated infections in the U.S.,” study author Sandra Farach, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “It’s estimated that SSIs occur in 2%-5% of patients undergoing inpatient surgery. They’re associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality and are a significant burden to the health care system, accounting for an estimated $3.5 to $10 billion in health care expenditures.”
In February 2015, the Association for periOperative Registered Nurses published recommendations on operating room attire, providing a guideline for modifying facility policies and regulatory requirements. It included stringent policies designed to minimize the exposed areas of skin and hair of operating room staff. “New attire policies were met with some criticism as there is a paucity of evidence-based data to support these recommendations,” said Dr. Farach, who helped conduct the study during her tenure as chief resident of general surgery at the University of Rochester (N.Y.) Medical Center.
A total of 6,517 patients were included in the analysis: 3,077 in the preimplementation group and 3,440 patients in the postimplementation group. The postimplementation group tended to be older and had significantly higher rates of hypertension, dialysis treatments, steroid use, and systemic inflammatory response syndrome, as well as higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification scores. “However, they had a significantly lower BMI, incidence of smoking and COPD, and a higher incidence of clean wounds, which would theoretically leave them less exposed to SSIs,” said Dr. Farach, who is now a pediatric surgical critical care fellow at Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital in Memphis.
Overall, the rate of SSIs by wound class increased between the preimplementation and postimplementation time periods: The percent of change was 0.6%, 0.9%, 2.3%, and 3.8% in the clean, clean-contaminated, contaminated, and dirty/infected cases, respectively. When the review was limited to clean or clean-contaminated cases, SSI increased slightly, from 0.7% to 0.8% (P = .085). There were no significant differences in the complication rate, 30-day mortality, unplanned return to the OR, or length of stay between preimplementation or postimplementation at either hospital.
When Dr. Farach and her associates examined the overall infection rate, they observed no significant differences preimplementation and postimplementation in the rates of incisional SSI (0.97% vs. 0.96%, respectively; P = .949), organ space SSI (1.20% vs. 0.81%; P = .115), and total SSIs (2.11% vs. 1.77%; P = .321). Multivariate analysis showed that implementation of OR changes was not associated with an increased risk of SSIs. Factors that did predict high SSI rates included preoperative SSI (adjusted odds ratio 23.04), long operative time (AOR 3.4), preoperative open wound (AOR 2.94), contaminated/dirty wound classes (AOR 2.32), and morbid obesity (AOR 1.8).
“A hypothetical analysis revealed that a sample of over 495,000 patients would be required to demonstrate a 10% incisional SSI reduction among patients with clean or clean-contaminated wounds,” Dr. Farach noted. “Nevertheless, the study showed a numerical increase in SSI during the study period. Policies regarding OR attire were universally unpopular. As a result, OR governance is now working to repeal these new policies at both hospitals.”
“Given the rarity of SSI in the population subset which is relevant to the OR attire question (clean and clean-contaminated wounds, 0.7%), designing a study to prove effectiveness of an intervention (i.e., a 10% improvement) is totally impractical to conduct as this would require nearly a half a million cases,” said Jacob Moalem, MD, the lead author of the study who is an endocrine surgeon at the University of Rochester. At the meeting, a discussant suggested that conducting such a study is feasible; however, “I would strongly argue that putting that many people through such a study, when we know that these attire rules have a deleterious effect on surgeon comfort and OR team dynamics and morale, would not be prudent,” Dr. Moalem said. “We know that surgeon comfort, ability to focus on the task at hand, and minimizing distractions in the OR are critically important in reducing errors. In my opinion, by continuing to focus on these unfounded attire restrictions, one would be far more likely to actually cause injury to a patient than to prevent a wound infection.”
The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – Implementation of strict operating room (OR) attire policies did not reduce the rates of superficial surgical site infections (SSIs), according to an analysis of more than 6,500 patients.
“SSIs are the most common cause of health care–associated infections in the U.S.,” study author Sandra Farach, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “It’s estimated that SSIs occur in 2%-5% of patients undergoing inpatient surgery. They’re associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality and are a significant burden to the health care system, accounting for an estimated $3.5 to $10 billion in health care expenditures.”
In February 2015, the Association for periOperative Registered Nurses published recommendations on operating room attire, providing a guideline for modifying facility policies and regulatory requirements. It included stringent policies designed to minimize the exposed areas of skin and hair of operating room staff. “New attire policies were met with some criticism as there is a paucity of evidence-based data to support these recommendations,” said Dr. Farach, who helped conduct the study during her tenure as chief resident of general surgery at the University of Rochester (N.Y.) Medical Center.
A total of 6,517 patients were included in the analysis: 3,077 in the preimplementation group and 3,440 patients in the postimplementation group. The postimplementation group tended to be older and had significantly higher rates of hypertension, dialysis treatments, steroid use, and systemic inflammatory response syndrome, as well as higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification scores. “However, they had a significantly lower BMI, incidence of smoking and COPD, and a higher incidence of clean wounds, which would theoretically leave them less exposed to SSIs,” said Dr. Farach, who is now a pediatric surgical critical care fellow at Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital in Memphis.
Overall, the rate of SSIs by wound class increased between the preimplementation and postimplementation time periods: The percent of change was 0.6%, 0.9%, 2.3%, and 3.8% in the clean, clean-contaminated, contaminated, and dirty/infected cases, respectively. When the review was limited to clean or clean-contaminated cases, SSI increased slightly, from 0.7% to 0.8% (P = .085). There were no significant differences in the complication rate, 30-day mortality, unplanned return to the OR, or length of stay between preimplementation or postimplementation at either hospital.
When Dr. Farach and her associates examined the overall infection rate, they observed no significant differences preimplementation and postimplementation in the rates of incisional SSI (0.97% vs. 0.96%, respectively; P = .949), organ space SSI (1.20% vs. 0.81%; P = .115), and total SSIs (2.11% vs. 1.77%; P = .321). Multivariate analysis showed that implementation of OR changes was not associated with an increased risk of SSIs. Factors that did predict high SSI rates included preoperative SSI (adjusted odds ratio 23.04), long operative time (AOR 3.4), preoperative open wound (AOR 2.94), contaminated/dirty wound classes (AOR 2.32), and morbid obesity (AOR 1.8).
“A hypothetical analysis revealed that a sample of over 495,000 patients would be required to demonstrate a 10% incisional SSI reduction among patients with clean or clean-contaminated wounds,” Dr. Farach noted. “Nevertheless, the study showed a numerical increase in SSI during the study period. Policies regarding OR attire were universally unpopular. As a result, OR governance is now working to repeal these new policies at both hospitals.”
“Given the rarity of SSI in the population subset which is relevant to the OR attire question (clean and clean-contaminated wounds, 0.7%), designing a study to prove effectiveness of an intervention (i.e., a 10% improvement) is totally impractical to conduct as this would require nearly a half a million cases,” said Jacob Moalem, MD, the lead author of the study who is an endocrine surgeon at the University of Rochester. At the meeting, a discussant suggested that conducting such a study is feasible; however, “I would strongly argue that putting that many people through such a study, when we know that these attire rules have a deleterious effect on surgeon comfort and OR team dynamics and morale, would not be prudent,” Dr. Moalem said. “We know that surgeon comfort, ability to focus on the task at hand, and minimizing distractions in the OR are critically important in reducing errors. In my opinion, by continuing to focus on these unfounded attire restrictions, one would be far more likely to actually cause injury to a patient than to prevent a wound infection.”
The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – Implementation of strict operating room (OR) attire policies did not reduce the rates of superficial surgical site infections (SSIs), according to an analysis of more than 6,500 patients.
“SSIs are the most common cause of health care–associated infections in the U.S.,” study author Sandra Farach, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “It’s estimated that SSIs occur in 2%-5% of patients undergoing inpatient surgery. They’re associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality and are a significant burden to the health care system, accounting for an estimated $3.5 to $10 billion in health care expenditures.”
In February 2015, the Association for periOperative Registered Nurses published recommendations on operating room attire, providing a guideline for modifying facility policies and regulatory requirements. It included stringent policies designed to minimize the exposed areas of skin and hair of operating room staff. “New attire policies were met with some criticism as there is a paucity of evidence-based data to support these recommendations,” said Dr. Farach, who helped conduct the study during her tenure as chief resident of general surgery at the University of Rochester (N.Y.) Medical Center.
A total of 6,517 patients were included in the analysis: 3,077 in the preimplementation group and 3,440 patients in the postimplementation group. The postimplementation group tended to be older and had significantly higher rates of hypertension, dialysis treatments, steroid use, and systemic inflammatory response syndrome, as well as higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification scores. “However, they had a significantly lower BMI, incidence of smoking and COPD, and a higher incidence of clean wounds, which would theoretically leave them less exposed to SSIs,” said Dr. Farach, who is now a pediatric surgical critical care fellow at Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital in Memphis.
Overall, the rate of SSIs by wound class increased between the preimplementation and postimplementation time periods: The percent of change was 0.6%, 0.9%, 2.3%, and 3.8% in the clean, clean-contaminated, contaminated, and dirty/infected cases, respectively. When the review was limited to clean or clean-contaminated cases, SSI increased slightly, from 0.7% to 0.8% (P = .085). There were no significant differences in the complication rate, 30-day mortality, unplanned return to the OR, or length of stay between preimplementation or postimplementation at either hospital.
When Dr. Farach and her associates examined the overall infection rate, they observed no significant differences preimplementation and postimplementation in the rates of incisional SSI (0.97% vs. 0.96%, respectively; P = .949), organ space SSI (1.20% vs. 0.81%; P = .115), and total SSIs (2.11% vs. 1.77%; P = .321). Multivariate analysis showed that implementation of OR changes was not associated with an increased risk of SSIs. Factors that did predict high SSI rates included preoperative SSI (adjusted odds ratio 23.04), long operative time (AOR 3.4), preoperative open wound (AOR 2.94), contaminated/dirty wound classes (AOR 2.32), and morbid obesity (AOR 1.8).
“A hypothetical analysis revealed that a sample of over 495,000 patients would be required to demonstrate a 10% incisional SSI reduction among patients with clean or clean-contaminated wounds,” Dr. Farach noted. “Nevertheless, the study showed a numerical increase in SSI during the study period. Policies regarding OR attire were universally unpopular. As a result, OR governance is now working to repeal these new policies at both hospitals.”
“Given the rarity of SSI in the population subset which is relevant to the OR attire question (clean and clean-contaminated wounds, 0.7%), designing a study to prove effectiveness of an intervention (i.e., a 10% improvement) is totally impractical to conduct as this would require nearly a half a million cases,” said Jacob Moalem, MD, the lead author of the study who is an endocrine surgeon at the University of Rochester. At the meeting, a discussant suggested that conducting such a study is feasible; however, “I would strongly argue that putting that many people through such a study, when we know that these attire rules have a deleterious effect on surgeon comfort and OR team dynamics and morale, would not be prudent,” Dr. Moalem said. “We know that surgeon comfort, ability to focus on the task at hand, and minimizing distractions in the OR are critically important in reducing errors. In my opinion, by continuing to focus on these unfounded attire restrictions, one would be far more likely to actually cause injury to a patient than to prevent a wound infection.”
The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point: Implementation of stringent operating room attire policies do not reduce rates superficial surgical site infections (SSIs).
Major finding: The researchers observed no significant differences preimplementation and postimplementation of OR attire policies in the rates of incisional SSI (0.97 vs. 0.96, respectively; P = .949), organ space SSI (1.20 vs 0.81; P = .115), and total SSIs (2.11 vs. 1.77; P = .321).
Study details: A study of 6,517 patients who underwent surgery at two tertiary care teaching hospitals.
Disclosures: The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
Some measures to control HAI sound better than they perform
SAN DIEGO – Some almost universally accepted measures against hospital-acquired infections are more costly, annoying, and time consuming than they’re worth, presenters agreed during a panel discussion at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Intra-abdominal antibiotic irrigation, chlorhexidine bathing, and even postsurgical antibiotic infusions have not consistently been shown to reduce infections. These measures do, however, ratchet up costs and can contribute to antibiotic resistance.
Some of these and other measures to prevent nosocomial infections may indeed reduce the risk, but the gain is small, said Charles H. Cook, MD.
“Chlorhexidine bathing, for example, is touted by many as a panacea for all the infections we’re talking about,” said Dr. Cook, a critical care surgeon at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, New York. “A recent meta-analysis in critical care units did find a reduced relative risk of 0.44 for central line bloodstream infections. But you needed to bathe 360 patients to prevent one infection. It’s what I call a long run for a short slide.”
Therese Duane, MD, FACS, agreed. A surgeon at the John Peter Smith Hospital, Ft. Worth, Tex., Dr. Duane reviewed three different guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infections: the ACS and Surgical Infection Society, the World Health Organization, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In looking for similarities between the documents, she said she found several well-accepted practices that just aren’t supported by good data.
Presurgical antimicrobial infusions got a strong thumbs-up from all the groups, but only under a very specific circumstance: The medication has to be administered well in advance of surgery for it to be effective.
“Your goal is to get the appropriate concentration into the tissues by the time of incision,” Dr. Duane said. “It takes time to get there – if you give it after the incision, you have bleeding and cellular death, and the antimicrobials cannot get to that incision and do their job. If I’m starting a case and they haven’t been given, I don’t ever start them after the incision, because then you have all of the risks and none of the benefits. In my opinion, we need to move to no further antimicrobials once the incision or case is over because it serves no purpose and is inconsistent with good antibiotic stewardship.”
Adhesive drapes got a resounding “eh” from the guidelines, Dr. Duane said. “You really do not need them. They’re expensive and they’re not improving outcomes, so don’t waste your time or money. We need to think about minimizing what isn’t helpful and maximizing the things that are worthwhile. That’s the way to practice good socially responsible surgery without breaking the bank,” she said.
Antimicrobial sutures got weak recommendations, Dr. Duane said. The evidence supporting their use was not very strong, although she said she feels triclosan-coated sutures are helpful in all kinds of surgery. Preoperative showering with an antiseptic received strong support, with alcohol-containing preps superior to chlorhexidine, which is better than povidone-iodine–containing solutions.
Deep-space irrigation with aqueous iodophor also received a weak recommendation, but Dr. Duane said the evidence does not support the use of antibiotic-containing irrigation in either the abdomen or the incision. “And the guidelines came out strongly against using antimicrobial agents on the incision,” she said. None of the guidelines issued a recommendation for or against antimicrobial dressings.
Protocolized infection-control bundles are a very great help in reducing the incidence of surgical site infections, Dr. Duane added. “They increase attention to detail and decrease the rates of infection.”
Dr. Cook agreed. “Central line bundles are one of the things that work” for line-associated bloodstream infections, he said. Since their large-scale adoption, mortality from these infections has dropped significantly; it was hovering around 28,000 per year in the mid-2000s, he said. “That’s about how many men die from prostate cancer every year.”
Central line infections are very costly too, he added – around $46,000 per event. “That comes to around $2 billion in direct and indirect costs every year.”
A 2006 study demonstrated the efficacy of central line bundles in the fight against these potentially devastating infections.
The bundled intervention comprised hand washing, using full-barrier precautions during the insertion of central venous catheters, cleaning the skin with chlorhexidine, avoiding the femoral site if possible, and removing unnecessary catheters. The median rate of catheter-related bloodstream infections per 1,000 catheter-days decreased from 2.7 at baseline to 0 at 3 months after implementation of the study intervention.
Antibiotic-coated or impregnated catheters do not work as well. A 2016 Cochrane review of 57 studies determined that the devices didn’t improve sepsis, all-cause mortality, or catheter-related local infections.
The jury may still be out on coated dressings or securing devices, however. Another Cochrane review, of 22 studies, found a 40% decrease in central line–associated bloodstream infections with these items. “There was moderate evidence that tip colonization was reduced, but the authors said more research is needed.”
The evidence looks stronger for alcohol-impregnated port protectors, Dr. Cook said. Two studies in particular support their use. In an oncology unit, the rate of these infections dropped from 2.3 to 0.3 per 1,000 catheter days after the port protectors were instituted.
In the second study, infection rates declined from 1.43 to 0.69 per 1,000 line-days after the protectors came on board.
“The advantage was seen mostly in ICUs, so the recommendations are to use them there,” Dr. Cook said.
Neither Dr. Cook nor Dr. Duane had any relevant financial disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @Alz Gal
SAN DIEGO – Some almost universally accepted measures against hospital-acquired infections are more costly, annoying, and time consuming than they’re worth, presenters agreed during a panel discussion at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Intra-abdominal antibiotic irrigation, chlorhexidine bathing, and even postsurgical antibiotic infusions have not consistently been shown to reduce infections. These measures do, however, ratchet up costs and can contribute to antibiotic resistance.
Some of these and other measures to prevent nosocomial infections may indeed reduce the risk, but the gain is small, said Charles H. Cook, MD.
“Chlorhexidine bathing, for example, is touted by many as a panacea for all the infections we’re talking about,” said Dr. Cook, a critical care surgeon at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, New York. “A recent meta-analysis in critical care units did find a reduced relative risk of 0.44 for central line bloodstream infections. But you needed to bathe 360 patients to prevent one infection. It’s what I call a long run for a short slide.”
Therese Duane, MD, FACS, agreed. A surgeon at the John Peter Smith Hospital, Ft. Worth, Tex., Dr. Duane reviewed three different guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infections: the ACS and Surgical Infection Society, the World Health Organization, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In looking for similarities between the documents, she said she found several well-accepted practices that just aren’t supported by good data.
Presurgical antimicrobial infusions got a strong thumbs-up from all the groups, but only under a very specific circumstance: The medication has to be administered well in advance of surgery for it to be effective.
“Your goal is to get the appropriate concentration into the tissues by the time of incision,” Dr. Duane said. “It takes time to get there – if you give it after the incision, you have bleeding and cellular death, and the antimicrobials cannot get to that incision and do their job. If I’m starting a case and they haven’t been given, I don’t ever start them after the incision, because then you have all of the risks and none of the benefits. In my opinion, we need to move to no further antimicrobials once the incision or case is over because it serves no purpose and is inconsistent with good antibiotic stewardship.”
Adhesive drapes got a resounding “eh” from the guidelines, Dr. Duane said. “You really do not need them. They’re expensive and they’re not improving outcomes, so don’t waste your time or money. We need to think about minimizing what isn’t helpful and maximizing the things that are worthwhile. That’s the way to practice good socially responsible surgery without breaking the bank,” she said.
Antimicrobial sutures got weak recommendations, Dr. Duane said. The evidence supporting their use was not very strong, although she said she feels triclosan-coated sutures are helpful in all kinds of surgery. Preoperative showering with an antiseptic received strong support, with alcohol-containing preps superior to chlorhexidine, which is better than povidone-iodine–containing solutions.
Deep-space irrigation with aqueous iodophor also received a weak recommendation, but Dr. Duane said the evidence does not support the use of antibiotic-containing irrigation in either the abdomen or the incision. “And the guidelines came out strongly against using antimicrobial agents on the incision,” she said. None of the guidelines issued a recommendation for or against antimicrobial dressings.
Protocolized infection-control bundles are a very great help in reducing the incidence of surgical site infections, Dr. Duane added. “They increase attention to detail and decrease the rates of infection.”
Dr. Cook agreed. “Central line bundles are one of the things that work” for line-associated bloodstream infections, he said. Since their large-scale adoption, mortality from these infections has dropped significantly; it was hovering around 28,000 per year in the mid-2000s, he said. “That’s about how many men die from prostate cancer every year.”
Central line infections are very costly too, he added – around $46,000 per event. “That comes to around $2 billion in direct and indirect costs every year.”
A 2006 study demonstrated the efficacy of central line bundles in the fight against these potentially devastating infections.
The bundled intervention comprised hand washing, using full-barrier precautions during the insertion of central venous catheters, cleaning the skin with chlorhexidine, avoiding the femoral site if possible, and removing unnecessary catheters. The median rate of catheter-related bloodstream infections per 1,000 catheter-days decreased from 2.7 at baseline to 0 at 3 months after implementation of the study intervention.
Antibiotic-coated or impregnated catheters do not work as well. A 2016 Cochrane review of 57 studies determined that the devices didn’t improve sepsis, all-cause mortality, or catheter-related local infections.
The jury may still be out on coated dressings or securing devices, however. Another Cochrane review, of 22 studies, found a 40% decrease in central line–associated bloodstream infections with these items. “There was moderate evidence that tip colonization was reduced, but the authors said more research is needed.”
The evidence looks stronger for alcohol-impregnated port protectors, Dr. Cook said. Two studies in particular support their use. In an oncology unit, the rate of these infections dropped from 2.3 to 0.3 per 1,000 catheter days after the port protectors were instituted.
In the second study, infection rates declined from 1.43 to 0.69 per 1,000 line-days after the protectors came on board.
“The advantage was seen mostly in ICUs, so the recommendations are to use them there,” Dr. Cook said.
Neither Dr. Cook nor Dr. Duane had any relevant financial disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @Alz Gal
SAN DIEGO – Some almost universally accepted measures against hospital-acquired infections are more costly, annoying, and time consuming than they’re worth, presenters agreed during a panel discussion at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Intra-abdominal antibiotic irrigation, chlorhexidine bathing, and even postsurgical antibiotic infusions have not consistently been shown to reduce infections. These measures do, however, ratchet up costs and can contribute to antibiotic resistance.
Some of these and other measures to prevent nosocomial infections may indeed reduce the risk, but the gain is small, said Charles H. Cook, MD.
“Chlorhexidine bathing, for example, is touted by many as a panacea for all the infections we’re talking about,” said Dr. Cook, a critical care surgeon at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, New York. “A recent meta-analysis in critical care units did find a reduced relative risk of 0.44 for central line bloodstream infections. But you needed to bathe 360 patients to prevent one infection. It’s what I call a long run for a short slide.”
Therese Duane, MD, FACS, agreed. A surgeon at the John Peter Smith Hospital, Ft. Worth, Tex., Dr. Duane reviewed three different guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infections: the ACS and Surgical Infection Society, the World Health Organization, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In looking for similarities between the documents, she said she found several well-accepted practices that just aren’t supported by good data.
Presurgical antimicrobial infusions got a strong thumbs-up from all the groups, but only under a very specific circumstance: The medication has to be administered well in advance of surgery for it to be effective.
“Your goal is to get the appropriate concentration into the tissues by the time of incision,” Dr. Duane said. “It takes time to get there – if you give it after the incision, you have bleeding and cellular death, and the antimicrobials cannot get to that incision and do their job. If I’m starting a case and they haven’t been given, I don’t ever start them after the incision, because then you have all of the risks and none of the benefits. In my opinion, we need to move to no further antimicrobials once the incision or case is over because it serves no purpose and is inconsistent with good antibiotic stewardship.”
Adhesive drapes got a resounding “eh” from the guidelines, Dr. Duane said. “You really do not need them. They’re expensive and they’re not improving outcomes, so don’t waste your time or money. We need to think about minimizing what isn’t helpful and maximizing the things that are worthwhile. That’s the way to practice good socially responsible surgery without breaking the bank,” she said.
Antimicrobial sutures got weak recommendations, Dr. Duane said. The evidence supporting their use was not very strong, although she said she feels triclosan-coated sutures are helpful in all kinds of surgery. Preoperative showering with an antiseptic received strong support, with alcohol-containing preps superior to chlorhexidine, which is better than povidone-iodine–containing solutions.
Deep-space irrigation with aqueous iodophor also received a weak recommendation, but Dr. Duane said the evidence does not support the use of antibiotic-containing irrigation in either the abdomen or the incision. “And the guidelines came out strongly against using antimicrobial agents on the incision,” she said. None of the guidelines issued a recommendation for or against antimicrobial dressings.
Protocolized infection-control bundles are a very great help in reducing the incidence of surgical site infections, Dr. Duane added. “They increase attention to detail and decrease the rates of infection.”
Dr. Cook agreed. “Central line bundles are one of the things that work” for line-associated bloodstream infections, he said. Since their large-scale adoption, mortality from these infections has dropped significantly; it was hovering around 28,000 per year in the mid-2000s, he said. “That’s about how many men die from prostate cancer every year.”
Central line infections are very costly too, he added – around $46,000 per event. “That comes to around $2 billion in direct and indirect costs every year.”
A 2006 study demonstrated the efficacy of central line bundles in the fight against these potentially devastating infections.
The bundled intervention comprised hand washing, using full-barrier precautions during the insertion of central venous catheters, cleaning the skin with chlorhexidine, avoiding the femoral site if possible, and removing unnecessary catheters. The median rate of catheter-related bloodstream infections per 1,000 catheter-days decreased from 2.7 at baseline to 0 at 3 months after implementation of the study intervention.
Antibiotic-coated or impregnated catheters do not work as well. A 2016 Cochrane review of 57 studies determined that the devices didn’t improve sepsis, all-cause mortality, or catheter-related local infections.
The jury may still be out on coated dressings or securing devices, however. Another Cochrane review, of 22 studies, found a 40% decrease in central line–associated bloodstream infections with these items. “There was moderate evidence that tip colonization was reduced, but the authors said more research is needed.”
The evidence looks stronger for alcohol-impregnated port protectors, Dr. Cook said. Two studies in particular support their use. In an oncology unit, the rate of these infections dropped from 2.3 to 0.3 per 1,000 catheter days after the port protectors were instituted.
In the second study, infection rates declined from 1.43 to 0.69 per 1,000 line-days after the protectors came on board.
“The advantage was seen mostly in ICUs, so the recommendations are to use them there,” Dr. Cook said.
Neither Dr. Cook nor Dr. Duane had any relevant financial disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @Alz Gal
FROM THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Early evidence shows that surgery can alter gut microbiome
SAN DIEGO – Surgery appears to stimulate abrupt changes in both the skin and gut microbiome, which in some patients may increase the risk of surgical site infections and anastomotic leaks. With that knowledge, researchers are exploring the very first steps toward a presurgical microbiome optimization protocol, Heidi Nelson, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
It’s very early in the journey, said Dr. Nelson, the Fred C. Andersen Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic, Rochester. Minn. And it won’t be a straightforward path: The human microbiome appears to be nearly as individually unique as the human fingerprint, so presurgical protocols might have to be individually tailored to each patient.
Dr. Nelson comoderated a session exploring this topic with John Alverdy, MD, FACS, of the University of Chicago. The panel discussed human and animal studies suggesting that the stress of surgery, when combined with subclinical ischemia and any baseline physiologic stress (chronic illness or radiation, for example) can cause some commensals to begin producing collagenase – a change that endangers even surgically sound anastomoses.
“It’s well known that bacteria can change their function in response to host stress,” said Dr. Shogan, a colorectal surgeon at the University of Chicago. “They recognize these factors and change their entire function. In our work, we found that Enterococcus began to express a tissue-destroying phenotype in response to subclinical ischemia related to surgery.”
The pathogenic flip doesn’t occur unless there are a couple of predisposing factors, he theorized. “There have to be multiple stresses involved. These could include smoking, steroids, obesity, and prior exposure to radiation – all things that we commonly see in our colorectal surgery patients. But when the right situation developed, we can see a proliferation of collagen-destroying bacteria that predispose to leaks.”
The skin microbiome is altered as well, with areas around abdominal incisions beginning to express gut flora, which increase the risk of a surgical site infection, said Andrew Yeh, MD, a general surgery resident at the University of Pittsburgh.
He presented data on 28 colorectal surgery patients, detailing perioperative changes in the chest and abdominal skin microbiome. All of the subjects were adults undergoing colon resection who had not been on any antibiotics at least 1 month before surgery. Skin sampling was performed before and after opening, with additional postoperative skin samples taken daily while the patient was in the hospital recovering. Dr. Yeh had DNA/RNA data on 431 samples taken from this group.
“We saw increases in Staphylococcus and Bacteroides on the skin – normally part of the gut microflora – in relative abundance, while Corynebacterium, a normal constituent of the skin microbiome, had decreased.”
These are all very early observations, though, and the surgical community is nowhere near being able to make any specific presurgical recommendations to optimize the microbiome, or postsurgical recommendations to manage it, said Neil Hyman, MD, FACS, professor of surgery at the University of Chicago.
While it does appear that good bacteria “gone bad” are associated with anastomotic leaks, he agreed that the right constellation of factors has to be in place for this to happen, including “the right bacteria [Enterococcus], the right virulence genes [collagenase], the right activating cures [long operation, blood loss], and the wrong microbiome [altered by smoking, chemotherapy, radiation, or other chronic stressors].”
“I think it’s safe to say that developing collagenase-producing bacteria at an anastomosis site is a bad thing, but the individual genetic makeup of every patient makes any one-size-fits-all protocol approach to treatment really problematic,” Dr. Hyman said.
None of the presenters had any financial disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
SAN DIEGO – Surgery appears to stimulate abrupt changes in both the skin and gut microbiome, which in some patients may increase the risk of surgical site infections and anastomotic leaks. With that knowledge, researchers are exploring the very first steps toward a presurgical microbiome optimization protocol, Heidi Nelson, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
It’s very early in the journey, said Dr. Nelson, the Fred C. Andersen Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic, Rochester. Minn. And it won’t be a straightforward path: The human microbiome appears to be nearly as individually unique as the human fingerprint, so presurgical protocols might have to be individually tailored to each patient.
Dr. Nelson comoderated a session exploring this topic with John Alverdy, MD, FACS, of the University of Chicago. The panel discussed human and animal studies suggesting that the stress of surgery, when combined with subclinical ischemia and any baseline physiologic stress (chronic illness or radiation, for example) can cause some commensals to begin producing collagenase – a change that endangers even surgically sound anastomoses.
“It’s well known that bacteria can change their function in response to host stress,” said Dr. Shogan, a colorectal surgeon at the University of Chicago. “They recognize these factors and change their entire function. In our work, we found that Enterococcus began to express a tissue-destroying phenotype in response to subclinical ischemia related to surgery.”
The pathogenic flip doesn’t occur unless there are a couple of predisposing factors, he theorized. “There have to be multiple stresses involved. These could include smoking, steroids, obesity, and prior exposure to radiation – all things that we commonly see in our colorectal surgery patients. But when the right situation developed, we can see a proliferation of collagen-destroying bacteria that predispose to leaks.”
The skin microbiome is altered as well, with areas around abdominal incisions beginning to express gut flora, which increase the risk of a surgical site infection, said Andrew Yeh, MD, a general surgery resident at the University of Pittsburgh.
He presented data on 28 colorectal surgery patients, detailing perioperative changes in the chest and abdominal skin microbiome. All of the subjects were adults undergoing colon resection who had not been on any antibiotics at least 1 month before surgery. Skin sampling was performed before and after opening, with additional postoperative skin samples taken daily while the patient was in the hospital recovering. Dr. Yeh had DNA/RNA data on 431 samples taken from this group.
“We saw increases in Staphylococcus and Bacteroides on the skin – normally part of the gut microflora – in relative abundance, while Corynebacterium, a normal constituent of the skin microbiome, had decreased.”
These are all very early observations, though, and the surgical community is nowhere near being able to make any specific presurgical recommendations to optimize the microbiome, or postsurgical recommendations to manage it, said Neil Hyman, MD, FACS, professor of surgery at the University of Chicago.
While it does appear that good bacteria “gone bad” are associated with anastomotic leaks, he agreed that the right constellation of factors has to be in place for this to happen, including “the right bacteria [Enterococcus], the right virulence genes [collagenase], the right activating cures [long operation, blood loss], and the wrong microbiome [altered by smoking, chemotherapy, radiation, or other chronic stressors].”
“I think it’s safe to say that developing collagenase-producing bacteria at an anastomosis site is a bad thing, but the individual genetic makeup of every patient makes any one-size-fits-all protocol approach to treatment really problematic,” Dr. Hyman said.
None of the presenters had any financial disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
SAN DIEGO – Surgery appears to stimulate abrupt changes in both the skin and gut microbiome, which in some patients may increase the risk of surgical site infections and anastomotic leaks. With that knowledge, researchers are exploring the very first steps toward a presurgical microbiome optimization protocol, Heidi Nelson, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
It’s very early in the journey, said Dr. Nelson, the Fred C. Andersen Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic, Rochester. Minn. And it won’t be a straightforward path: The human microbiome appears to be nearly as individually unique as the human fingerprint, so presurgical protocols might have to be individually tailored to each patient.
Dr. Nelson comoderated a session exploring this topic with John Alverdy, MD, FACS, of the University of Chicago. The panel discussed human and animal studies suggesting that the stress of surgery, when combined with subclinical ischemia and any baseline physiologic stress (chronic illness or radiation, for example) can cause some commensals to begin producing collagenase – a change that endangers even surgically sound anastomoses.
“It’s well known that bacteria can change their function in response to host stress,” said Dr. Shogan, a colorectal surgeon at the University of Chicago. “They recognize these factors and change their entire function. In our work, we found that Enterococcus began to express a tissue-destroying phenotype in response to subclinical ischemia related to surgery.”
The pathogenic flip doesn’t occur unless there are a couple of predisposing factors, he theorized. “There have to be multiple stresses involved. These could include smoking, steroids, obesity, and prior exposure to radiation – all things that we commonly see in our colorectal surgery patients. But when the right situation developed, we can see a proliferation of collagen-destroying bacteria that predispose to leaks.”
The skin microbiome is altered as well, with areas around abdominal incisions beginning to express gut flora, which increase the risk of a surgical site infection, said Andrew Yeh, MD, a general surgery resident at the University of Pittsburgh.
He presented data on 28 colorectal surgery patients, detailing perioperative changes in the chest and abdominal skin microbiome. All of the subjects were adults undergoing colon resection who had not been on any antibiotics at least 1 month before surgery. Skin sampling was performed before and after opening, with additional postoperative skin samples taken daily while the patient was in the hospital recovering. Dr. Yeh had DNA/RNA data on 431 samples taken from this group.
“We saw increases in Staphylococcus and Bacteroides on the skin – normally part of the gut microflora – in relative abundance, while Corynebacterium, a normal constituent of the skin microbiome, had decreased.”
These are all very early observations, though, and the surgical community is nowhere near being able to make any specific presurgical recommendations to optimize the microbiome, or postsurgical recommendations to manage it, said Neil Hyman, MD, FACS, professor of surgery at the University of Chicago.
While it does appear that good bacteria “gone bad” are associated with anastomotic leaks, he agreed that the right constellation of factors has to be in place for this to happen, including “the right bacteria [Enterococcus], the right virulence genes [collagenase], the right activating cures [long operation, blood loss], and the wrong microbiome [altered by smoking, chemotherapy, radiation, or other chronic stressors].”
“I think it’s safe to say that developing collagenase-producing bacteria at an anastomosis site is a bad thing, but the individual genetic makeup of every patient makes any one-size-fits-all protocol approach to treatment really problematic,” Dr. Hyman said.
None of the presenters had any financial disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
VIDEO: Rapid influenza test obviates empiric antivirals
TORONTO – A test that only requires a maximum 2-hour wait for results was highly accurate at detecting influenza and respiratory syncytial virus infection in lung transplant patients, according to research presented at the CHEST annual meeting on Oct. 30.
This rapid and highly accurate test for detecting three common respiratory viruses has dramatically cut the need for empiric treatments and the risk for causing nosocomial infections in lung transplant patients who develop severe upper respiratory infections, Macé M. Schuurmans, MD, noted during the presentation.
This study involved 100 consecutive lung transplant patients who presented at Zurich University Hospital with signs of severe upper respiratory infection. The researchers ran the rapid and standard diagnostic tests for each patient and found that, relative to the standard test, the rapid test had positive and negative predictive values of 95%.
The number of empiric treatments with oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and ribavirin to treat a suspected influenza or respiratory syncytial virus infection (RSV) has “strongly diminished” by about two-thirds, noted Dr. Schuurmans, who is a pulmonologist at the hospital.
Until the rapid test became available, Dr. Shuurmans and his associates used a standard polymerase chain reaction test that takes 36-48 hours to yield a result. Using this test made treating patients empirically with oseltamivir and oral antibiotics for a couple of days a necessity, he said in a video interview. The older test also required isolating patients to avoid the potential spread of influenza or RSV in the hospital.
The rapid test, which became available for U.S. use in early 2017, covers influenza A and B and RSV in a single test with a single mouth-swab specimen.
“We now routinely use the rapid test and don’t prescribe empiric antivirals or antibiotics as often,” Dr. Schuurmans said. “There is much less drug cost and fewer potential adverse effects from empiric treatment.” Specimens still also undergo conventional testing, however, because that can identify eight additional viruses that the rapid test doesn’t cover.
Dr. Schuurmans acknowledged that further study needs to assess the cost-benefit of the rapid test to confirm that its added expense is offset by reduced expenses for empiric treatment and hospital isolation.
He had no disclosures. The study received no commercial support.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
TORONTO – A test that only requires a maximum 2-hour wait for results was highly accurate at detecting influenza and respiratory syncytial virus infection in lung transplant patients, according to research presented at the CHEST annual meeting on Oct. 30.
This rapid and highly accurate test for detecting three common respiratory viruses has dramatically cut the need for empiric treatments and the risk for causing nosocomial infections in lung transplant patients who develop severe upper respiratory infections, Macé M. Schuurmans, MD, noted during the presentation.
This study involved 100 consecutive lung transplant patients who presented at Zurich University Hospital with signs of severe upper respiratory infection. The researchers ran the rapid and standard diagnostic tests for each patient and found that, relative to the standard test, the rapid test had positive and negative predictive values of 95%.
The number of empiric treatments with oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and ribavirin to treat a suspected influenza or respiratory syncytial virus infection (RSV) has “strongly diminished” by about two-thirds, noted Dr. Schuurmans, who is a pulmonologist at the hospital.
Until the rapid test became available, Dr. Shuurmans and his associates used a standard polymerase chain reaction test that takes 36-48 hours to yield a result. Using this test made treating patients empirically with oseltamivir and oral antibiotics for a couple of days a necessity, he said in a video interview. The older test also required isolating patients to avoid the potential spread of influenza or RSV in the hospital.
The rapid test, which became available for U.S. use in early 2017, covers influenza A and B and RSV in a single test with a single mouth-swab specimen.
“We now routinely use the rapid test and don’t prescribe empiric antivirals or antibiotics as often,” Dr. Schuurmans said. “There is much less drug cost and fewer potential adverse effects from empiric treatment.” Specimens still also undergo conventional testing, however, because that can identify eight additional viruses that the rapid test doesn’t cover.
Dr. Schuurmans acknowledged that further study needs to assess the cost-benefit of the rapid test to confirm that its added expense is offset by reduced expenses for empiric treatment and hospital isolation.
He had no disclosures. The study received no commercial support.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
TORONTO – A test that only requires a maximum 2-hour wait for results was highly accurate at detecting influenza and respiratory syncytial virus infection in lung transplant patients, according to research presented at the CHEST annual meeting on Oct. 30.
This rapid and highly accurate test for detecting three common respiratory viruses has dramatically cut the need for empiric treatments and the risk for causing nosocomial infections in lung transplant patients who develop severe upper respiratory infections, Macé M. Schuurmans, MD, noted during the presentation.
This study involved 100 consecutive lung transplant patients who presented at Zurich University Hospital with signs of severe upper respiratory infection. The researchers ran the rapid and standard diagnostic tests for each patient and found that, relative to the standard test, the rapid test had positive and negative predictive values of 95%.
The number of empiric treatments with oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and ribavirin to treat a suspected influenza or respiratory syncytial virus infection (RSV) has “strongly diminished” by about two-thirds, noted Dr. Schuurmans, who is a pulmonologist at the hospital.
Until the rapid test became available, Dr. Shuurmans and his associates used a standard polymerase chain reaction test that takes 36-48 hours to yield a result. Using this test made treating patients empirically with oseltamivir and oral antibiotics for a couple of days a necessity, he said in a video interview. The older test also required isolating patients to avoid the potential spread of influenza or RSV in the hospital.
The rapid test, which became available for U.S. use in early 2017, covers influenza A and B and RSV in a single test with a single mouth-swab specimen.
“We now routinely use the rapid test and don’t prescribe empiric antivirals or antibiotics as often,” Dr. Schuurmans said. “There is much less drug cost and fewer potential adverse effects from empiric treatment.” Specimens still also undergo conventional testing, however, because that can identify eight additional viruses that the rapid test doesn’t cover.
Dr. Schuurmans acknowledged that further study needs to assess the cost-benefit of the rapid test to confirm that its added expense is offset by reduced expenses for empiric treatment and hospital isolation.
He had no disclosures. The study received no commercial support.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
AT CHEST 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The rapid test had positive and negative predictive values of 95%.
Data source: A single-center observational study of 100 consecutive lung transplant recipients who presented with severe, acute respiratory infection.
Disclosures: Dr. Schuurmans had no disclosures. The study received no commercial support.
VIDEO: Researchers beginning to explore microbiome’s effect on surgical outcomes
SAN DIEGO – Surgery seems to stimulate abrupt changes in both the skin and gut microbiome, which in some patients may increase the risk of surgical-site infections and anastomotic leaks. With that knowledge, researchers are exploring the very first steps toward a presurgical microbiome optimization protocol, Heidi Nelson, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
It’s very early in the journey, said Dr. Nelson, the Fred C. Andersen Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. The path is not straightforward because the human microbiome appears to be nearly as individually unique as the human fingerprint, so presurgical protocols might have to be individually tailored to each patient.
Dr. Nelson comoderated a session exploring this topic with John Alverdy, MD, FACS, of the University of Chicago. The panel discussed human and animal studies suggesting that the stress of surgery, when combined with subclinical ischemia and any baseline physiologic stress (chronic illness or radiation, for example), can cause some commensals to begin producing collagenase – a change that endangers even surgically sound anastomoses. The skin microbiome is altered as well, with areas around abdominal incisions beginning to express gut flora, which increase the risk of a surgical-site infection.
Through diet or other presurgical interventions, Dr. Nelson said in a video interview, it might be possible to optimize the microbiome and reduce the chances of some of these occurrences.
She had no financial disclosures.
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
SAN DIEGO – Surgery seems to stimulate abrupt changes in both the skin and gut microbiome, which in some patients may increase the risk of surgical-site infections and anastomotic leaks. With that knowledge, researchers are exploring the very first steps toward a presurgical microbiome optimization protocol, Heidi Nelson, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
It’s very early in the journey, said Dr. Nelson, the Fred C. Andersen Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. The path is not straightforward because the human microbiome appears to be nearly as individually unique as the human fingerprint, so presurgical protocols might have to be individually tailored to each patient.
Dr. Nelson comoderated a session exploring this topic with John Alverdy, MD, FACS, of the University of Chicago. The panel discussed human and animal studies suggesting that the stress of surgery, when combined with subclinical ischemia and any baseline physiologic stress (chronic illness or radiation, for example), can cause some commensals to begin producing collagenase – a change that endangers even surgically sound anastomoses. The skin microbiome is altered as well, with areas around abdominal incisions beginning to express gut flora, which increase the risk of a surgical-site infection.
Through diet or other presurgical interventions, Dr. Nelson said in a video interview, it might be possible to optimize the microbiome and reduce the chances of some of these occurrences.
She had no financial disclosures.
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
SAN DIEGO – Surgery seems to stimulate abrupt changes in both the skin and gut microbiome, which in some patients may increase the risk of surgical-site infections and anastomotic leaks. With that knowledge, researchers are exploring the very first steps toward a presurgical microbiome optimization protocol, Heidi Nelson, MD, FACS, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
It’s very early in the journey, said Dr. Nelson, the Fred C. Andersen Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. The path is not straightforward because the human microbiome appears to be nearly as individually unique as the human fingerprint, so presurgical protocols might have to be individually tailored to each patient.
Dr. Nelson comoderated a session exploring this topic with John Alverdy, MD, FACS, of the University of Chicago. The panel discussed human and animal studies suggesting that the stress of surgery, when combined with subclinical ischemia and any baseline physiologic stress (chronic illness or radiation, for example), can cause some commensals to begin producing collagenase – a change that endangers even surgically sound anastomoses. The skin microbiome is altered as well, with areas around abdominal incisions beginning to express gut flora, which increase the risk of a surgical-site infection.
Through diet or other presurgical interventions, Dr. Nelson said in a video interview, it might be possible to optimize the microbiome and reduce the chances of some of these occurrences.
She had no financial disclosures.
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
