Search

Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) has emerged as a relevant multidrug-resistant pathogen and potentially lethal etiology of health care associated infections worldwide. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to assess factors associated with mortality in patients with VREF bacteremia in a major tertiary referral hospital in Southern Brazil. All documented cases of bacteremia identified between May 2010 and July 2012 were evaluated. Cox regression was performed to determine whether the characteristics related to the host or antimicrobial treatment were associated with the all-cause 30-day mortality. In total, 35 patients with documented VREF bacteremia were identified during the study period. The median APACHE-II score of the study population was 26 (interquartile range: 10).The overall 30-day mortality was 65.7%. All VREF isolates were sensitive to linezolid, daptomycin, and quinupristin-dalfopristin. Line zolid was the only antimicrobial agent with in vitro activity against VREF that was administered to the cohort. After multivariate analysis, linezolid treatment (HR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.27) and presence of acute kidney injury at the onset of bacteremia (HR, 4.01; 95% CI, 1.62-9.94) were independently associated with mortality. Presentation with acute kidney injury and lack of treatment with an effective antibiotic poses risk for mortality in patients with VREF bacteremia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in patients with bipolar disorder. The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors associated with positive coronary calcium score (CCS) in individuals with bipolar disorder type 1. Methods: Patients from the Bipolar Disorder Program at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil, underwent computed tomography scanning for calcium score measurement. Clinical and sociodemographic variables were compared between patients according to their CCS status: negative (CCS = 0) or positive (CCS > 0). Poisson regression analysis was used to examine the association of CCS with number of psychiatric hospitalizations. Results: Out of 41 patients evaluated, only 10 had a positive CCS. Individuals in the CCS-positive group were older (55.2±4.2 vs. 43.1±10.0 years; p = 0.001) and had more psychiatric hospitalizations (4.7±3.0 vs. 2.6±2.5; p = 0.04) when compared with CCS-negative subjects. The number of previous psychiatric hospitalizations correlated positively with CCS (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Age and number of psychiatric hospitalizations were significantly associated with higher CCS, which might be a potential method for diagnosis and stratification of cardiovascular disease in bipolar patients. There is a need for increased awareness of risk assessment in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Despite its implementation in several countries, there has not been a randomized clinical trial to assess whether telemedicine in intensive care units (ICUs) could improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients., Objective: To determine whether an intervention comprising daily multidisciplinary rounds and monthly audit and feedback meetings performed by a remote board-certified intensivist reduces ICU length of stay (LOS) compared with usual care., Design, Setting, and Participants: A parallel cluster randomized clinical trial with a baseline period in 30 general ICUs in Brazil in which daily multidisciplinary rounds performed by board-certified intensivists were not routinely available. All consecutive adult patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to the participating ICUs, excluding those admitted due to justice-related issues, were enrolled between June 1, 2019, and April 7, 2021, with last follow-up on July 6, 2021., Intervention: Remote daily multidisciplinary rounds led by a board-certified intensivist through telemedicine, monthly audit and feedback meetings for discussion of ICU performance indicators, and provision of evidence-based clinical protocols., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ICU LOS at the patient level. Secondary outcomes included ICU efficiency, in-hospital mortality, incidence of central line-associated bloodstream infections, ventilator-associated events, catheter-associated urinary tract infections, ventilator-free days at 28 days, patient-days receiving oral or enteral feeding, patient-days under light sedation, and rate of patients with oxygen saturation values under that of normoxemia, assessed using generalized linear mixed models., Results: Among 17 024 patients (1794 in the baseline period and 15 230 in the intervention period), the mean (SD) age was 61 (18) years, 44.7% were female, the median (IQR) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 6 (2-9), and 45.5% were invasively mechanically ventilated at admission. The median (IQR) time under intervention was 20 (16-21) months. Mean (SD) ICU LOS, adjusted for baseline assessment, did not differ significantly between the tele-critical care and usual care groups (8.1 [10.0] and 7.1 [9.0] days; percentage change, 8.2% [95% CI, -5.4% to 23.8%]; P = .24). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses and prespecified subgroups. There were no statistically significant differences in any other secondary or exploratory outcomes., Conclusions and Relevance: Daily multidisciplinary rounds conducted by a board-certified intensivist through telemedicine did not reduce ICU LOS in critically ill adult patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03920501.

Background: Previous studies have demonstrated a high risk of arterial and venous thromboembolic events as a consequence of direct viral damage to endothelial cells by SARS-CoV-2 and a procoagulant milieu due to increased biomarkers, such as D-dimer, fibrinogen, and factor VIII. Although randomized controlled trials of antithrombotic therapies have been conducted in hospitalized patients, few have evaluated the role of thromboprophylaxis in an outpatient setting., Objective: To assess whether antithrombotic prophylaxis with rivaroxaban reduces the risk of venous or arterial thrombotic events, invasive ventilatory support, and death in COVID-19 outpatients., Methods: The COVID Antithrombotic Rivaroxaban Evaluation (CARE) study, a multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial of rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 14 days or local standard treatment alone to prevent adverse outcomes, is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04757857). The inclusion criteria are adults with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild or moderate symptoms without indication for hospitalization, within 7 days of symptom onset, and 1 risk factor for COVID-19 complication (> 65 years, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or other chronic lung diseases, smoking, immunosuppression, or obesity). The primary composite endpoint, which includes venous thromboembolism, invasive mechanical ventilation, major acute cardiovascular events, and mortality within 30 days of randomization, will be assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. All patients will provide informed consent. A significance level of 5% will be used for all statistical tests., Results: Major thrombotic and bleeding outcomes, hospitalizations, and deaths will be centrally adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee blinded to the assigned treatment groups., Conclusion: The CARE study will provide relevant and contemporary information about the potential role of thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19.

Background: The effects of convalescent plasma (CP) therapy in hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. This study investigates the effect of CP on clinical improvement in these patients., Methods: This is an investigator-initiated, randomised, parallel arm, open-label, superiority clinical trial. Patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to two infusions of CP plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC alone. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with clinical improvement 28 days after enrolment., Results: A total of 160 (80 in each arm) patients (66.3% critically ill, 33.7% severely ill) completed the trial. The median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 60.5 (48-68) years; 58.1% were male and the median (IQR) time from symptom onset to randomisation was 10 (8-12) days. Neutralising antibody titres >1:80 were present in 133 (83.1%) patients at baseline. The proportion of patients with clinical improvement on day 28 was 61.3% in the CP+SOC group and 65.0% in the SOC group (difference -3.7%, 95% CI -18.8-11.3%). The results were similar in the severe and critically ill subgroups. There was no significant difference between CP+SOC and SOC groups in pre-specified secondary outcomes, including 28-day mortality, days alive and free of respiratory support and duration of invasive ventilatory support. Inflammatory and other laboratory marker values on days 3, 7 and 14 were similar between groups., Conclusions: CP+SOC did not result in a higher proportion of clinical improvement on day 28 in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 compared to SOC alone., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: L. Sekine has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: B. Arns has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: B.R. Fabro has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M.M. Cipolatt has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.R.G. Machado received support from “Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)” (2017/24769-2). Conflict of interest: E.L. Durigon has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: E. Parolo has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.A.S. Pellegrini has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M.V. Viana has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. Schwarz has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T.C. Lisboa has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.M.S. Dora has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.P. Portich has nothing to disclose. A.A. Paz has nothing to disclose. L. Silla has nothing to disclose. A.M. Balsan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F.d-S. Schirmer has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.P.M. Franz has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L.M. da-Silveira has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.C. Breunig has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: V. Petersen has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Sosnoski has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N.F. Mesquita has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F.C.Z. Volpato has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Sganzerla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Falavigna has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.G. Rosa received research grants from Brazilian Ministry of Health. Conflict of interest: A.P. Zavascki is a research fellow of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Ministry of Science and Technology, Brazil (304226/2018-1), and receives a research grant not related to this work from Pfizer (WI242215 2018)., (Copyright ©The authors 2022.)

Background: Despite the need for targeting specific therapeutic options for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there has been no evidence of effectiveness of any specific treatment for the outpatient clinical setting. There are few randomized studies evaluating hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in non-hospitalized patients. These studies indicate no benefit from the use of HCQ, but they assessed different primary outcomes and presented important biases for outcome evaluation., Objective: To evaluate if HCQ may prevent hospitalization due to COVID-19 compared to a matching placebo., Methods: The COVID-19 Outpatient Prevention Evaluation (COPE) study is a pragmatic, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating the use of HCQ (800 mg on day 1 and 400 mg from day 2 to day 7) or matching placebo for the prevention of hospitalization due to COVID-19 in early non-hospitalized confirmed or suspected cases. Inclusion criteria are adults (≥ 18 years) seeking medical care with mild symptoms of COVID-19, with randomization ≤ 7 days after symptom onset, without indication of hospitalization at study screening, and with at least one risk factor for complication (> 65 years; hypertension; diabetes mellitus; asthma; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or other chronic lung diseases; smoking; immunosuppression; or obesity). All hypothesis tests will be two-sided. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant in all analyses. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04466540., Results: Clinical outcomes will be centrally adjudicated by an independent clinical event committee blinded to the assigned treatment groups. The primary efficacy endpoint will be assessed following the intention-to-treat principle., Conclusion: This study has the potential to reliably answer the scientific question of HCQ use in outpatients with COVID-19. To our knowledge, this is the largest trial evaluating HCQ in non-hospitalized individuals with COVID-19.

We conducted a prospective cohort study in a single tertiary hospital with the aim of assessing predictors of multidrug-resistant bacteremia in 307 cases of febrile neutropenia in adult patients with cancer. On multivariate analysis using stepwise logistic regression, age (P = .009), duration of neutropenia (P = .022), and presence of an indwelling central venous catheter (P = .022) were associated with bloodstream infection by multidrug-resistant bacteria., (Copyright © 2014 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)