Search

Abstract Background In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, antifungal overuse may have occurred in our hospitals as it has been previously reported for antibacterials. Methods To investigate the impact of COVID-19 on antifungal consumption, a multicenter retrospective study including four medical sites and 14 intensive care units (ICU) was performed. Antifungal consumption and incidences of invasive fungal diseases before and during COVID-19 pandemic, for non-COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 patients, were described. Results An increase in voriconazole consumption was observed in 2020 compared with 2019 for both the whole hospital and the ICU (+ 40.3% and + 63.7%, respectively), whereas the incidence of invasive aspergillosis significantly increased in slightly lower proportions in the ICU (+ 46%). Caspofungin consumption also increased in 2020 compared to 2019 for both the whole hospital and the ICU (+ 34.9% and + 17.0%, respectively) with an increased incidence of invasive candidiasis in the whole hospital and the ICU but in lower proportions (+ 20.0% and + 10.9%, respectively). Conclusions We observed an increased consumption of antifungals including voriconazole and caspofungin in our hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic and explained in part by an increased incidence of invasive fungal diseases in COVID-19 patients. These results are of utmost importance as it raises concern about the urgent need for appropriate antifungal stewardship activities to control antifungal consumption.

Summary: Bacterial infections are the most frequent precipitating event in patients with acute decompensation of cirrhosis (AD) and are associated with high mortality. Early diagnosis is challenging due to cirrhosis-related systemic inflammation. Here we investigated the potential of circulating microRNAs to diagnose bacterial infections and predict survival in cirrhotic patients with AD. High throughput profiling of circulating microRNAs was performed using the Nanostring technology in 57 AD patients and 24 patients with compensated cirrhosis (CC). Circulating miRs profiling showed that: (a) miRs differentially detected in AD vs. CC were mostly down-regulated; (b) a composite score including absolute neutrophil count, C reactive protein and miR-362-3p could diagnose bacterial infection with an excellent performance (AUC of 0.825 [95% CI = 0.671–0.980; p

Abstract Objective To compare old patients hospitalized in ICU for respiratory distress due to COVID-19 with old patients hospitalized in ICU for a non-COVID-19-related reason in terms of autonomy and quality of life. Design Comparison of two prospective multi-centric studies. Setting This study was based on two prospective multi-centric studies, the Senior-COVID-Rea cohort (COVID-19-diagnosed ICU-admitted patients aged over 60) and the FRAGIREA cohort (ICU-admitted patients aged over 70). Patients We included herein the patients from both cohorts who had been evaluated at day 180 after admission (ADL score and quality of life). Interventions None. Measurements and main results A total of 93 COVID-19 patients and 185 control-ICU patients were included. Both groups were not balanced on age, body mass index, mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, and ADL and SAPS II scores. We modeled with ordered logistic regression the influence of COVID-19 on the quality of life and the ADL score. After adjustment on these factors, we observed COVID-19 patients were less likely to have a loss of usual activities (aOR [95% CI] 0.47 [0.23; 0.94]), a loss of mobility (aOR [95% CI] 0.30 [0.14; 0.63]), and a loss of ADL score (aOR [95% CI] 0.30 [0.14; 0.63]). On day 180, 52 (56%) COVID-19 patients presented signs of dyspnea, 37 (40%) still used analgesics, 17 (18%) used anxiolytics, and 14 (13%) used antidepressant. Conclusions COVID-19-related ICU stay was not associated with a lower quality of life or lower autonomy compared to non-COVID-19-related ICU stay.

Background: Candidemia is a major cause of mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU). According to the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), an echinocandin is recommended as initial therapy and fluconazole as an alternative. In a context of echinocandin resistance development, the question arising is whether azoles are a suitable alternative to echinocandins for the treatment of candidemia in critically ill patients. Methods: A 3-year (2015–2017) retrospective multicentric cohort study was conducted. Adult patients with a diagnosis of candidemia during the ICU stay and treated with echinocandins or azoles were included. Demographic, clinical data, mycological data, and antifungal treatments were collected. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, univariate analysis, and a multivariate logistic regression analysis using a propensity score with the inverse probability of treatment weighting method were performed. Findings: Seventy-nine patients (n = 79) were analyzed. Treatment success, as well as survival on day 90 (Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, log rank test, p = 0.542), were comparable between patients who received echinocandins (caspofungin (n = 47)) or azoles (fluconazole (n = 29) or voriconazole (n = 3)). A multivariable analysis demonstrated that higher SOFA score on the day of candidemia diagnosis and absence of adequate Candida source control were independently associated with a greater risk of 90-day mortality, whereas azoles treatment was not associated with an excess 90-day mortality. Interpretation: This study confirms that the use of azoles recommended for candidemia, mostly fluconazole, as a first-line therapy is a reasonable alternative to caspofungin for ICU patients in our institution. This needs to be included in local guidelines through antifungal stewardship programs. Keywords: Candidemia, Caspofungin, Fluconazole, Voriconazole, Mortality, Propensity score

Introduction With the spread of COVID-19 epidemic, health plans must be adapted continuously. There is an urgent need to define the best care courses of patients with COVID-19, especially in intensive care units (ICUs), according to their individualised benefit/risk ratio. Since older age is associated with poorer short-term and long-term outcomes, prediction models are needed, that may assist clinicians in their ICU admission decision. Senior-COVID-Rea was designed to evaluate, in patients over 60 years old admitted in ICU for severe COVID-19 disease, the impact of age and geriatric and paraclinical parameters on their mortality 30 days after ICU admission.Methods and analysis This is a multicentre survey protocol to be conducted in seven hospitals of the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region, France. All patients over 60 years old admitted in ICU for severe COVID-19 infection (or their legally acceptable representative) will be proposed to enter the study and to fill in a questionnaire regarding their functional and nutritional parameters 1 month before COVID-19 infection. Paraclinical parameters at ICU admission will be collected: lymphocytes and neutrophils counts, high-fluorescent lymphoid cells and immature granulocytes percentages (Sysmex data), D-dimers, C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), creatinine, CT scan for lung extension rate as well as clinical resuscitation scores, and the delay between the first signs of infection and ICU admission. The primary outcome will be the overall survival at day 30 post-ICU admission. The analysis of factors predicting mortality at day 30 will be carried out using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Multivariate logistic regression will consider up to 15 factors.The ambition of this trial, which takes into account the different approaches of geriatric vulnerability, is to define the respective abilities of different operational criteria of frailty to predict patients’ outcomes.Ethics and dissemination The study protocol was ethically approved. The results of the primary and secondary objectives will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT04422340.

Summary: Barriers to the implementation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for surgical site infection (SSI) surveillance have been described in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to estimate the SSI incidence rate in a Cambodian hospital and to compare different modalities of SSI surveillance. We performed an active prospective study with post-discharge surveillance. During the hospital stay, trained surveyors collected the CDC criteria to identify SSI by direct examination of the surgical site. After discharge, a card was given to each included patient to be presented to all practitioners examining the surgical site. Among 167 patients, direct examination of the surgical site identified a cumulative incidence rate of 14 infections per 100 patients. An independent review of medical charts presented a sensitivity of 16%. The sensitivity of the purulent drainage criterion to detect SSIs was 83%. After hospital discharge, 87% of the patients provided follow-up data, and nine purulent drainages were reported by a practitioner (cumulative incidence rate: 20%). Overall, the incidence rate was dependent on the surveillance modalities. The review of medical charts to identify SSIs during hospitalization was not effective; the use of a follow-up card with phone calls for post-discharge surveillance was effective. Keywords: Surgical wound infection, Cambodia, Infection control, Developing countries, Follow-up studies, Feasibility studies