A multicentre evaluation and expert recommendations of use of the newly developed BioFire Joint Infection polymerase chain reaction panel.

Septic arthritis is a serious condition with significant morbidity and mortality, routinely diagnosed using culture. The FDA has recently approved the rapid molecular BioFire® Joint Infection Panel (BJIP) for synovial fluid. We aimed to evaluate the BJIP compared to culture and its potential use in patient management. A multicentre retrospective evaluation of BJIP was conducted in the UK and Ireland. Positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) were calculated between the BJIP and routine culture. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion addressing the optimal or potential case use of the assay practice was facilitated. Three hundred ninety-nine surplus synovial fluid samples (~ 70% from native joints) from eight centres were processed using BJIP in addition to routine culture. An increased yield of positive results was detected using BJIP compared to routine culture (98 vs 83), giving an overall PPA of 91.6% and overall NPA of 93% for the BJIP compared to culture results. The BJIP detected resistant markers and additional organisms that could influence antibiotic choices including Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Kingella kingae. The MDT agreed that the assay could be used, in addition to standard methods, in adult and children patients with specialist advice use based on local needs. Rapid results from BJIP were assessed as having potential clinical impact on patient management. Organisms not included in the panel may be clinically significant and may limit the value of this test for PJI.

Oral versus Intravenous Antibiotics for Bone and Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: The management of complex orthopedic infections usually includes a prolonged course of intravenous antibiotic agents. We investigated whether oral antibiotic therapy is noninferior to intravenous antibiotic therapy for this indication. METHODS: We enrolled adults who were being treated for bone or joint infection at 26 U.K. centers. Within 7 days after surgery (or, if the infection was being managed without surgery, within 7 days after the start of antibiotic treatment), participants were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous or oral antibiotics to complete the first 6 weeks of therapy. Follow-on oral antibiotics were permitted in both groups. The primary end point was definitive treatment failure within 1 year after randomization. In the analysis of the risk of the primary end point, the noninferiority margin was 7.5 percentage points. RESULTS: Among the 1054 participants (527 in each group), end-point data were available for 1015 (96.3%). Treatment failure occurred in 74 of 506 participants (14.6%) in the intravenous group and 67 of 509 participants (13.2%) in the oral group. Missing end-point data (39 participants, 3.7%) were imputed. The intention-to-treat analysis showed a difference in the risk of definitive treatment failure (oral group vs. intravenous group) of -1.4 percentage points (90% confidence interval [CI], -4.9 to 2.2; 95% CI, -5.6 to 2.9), indicating noninferiority. Complete-case, per-protocol, and sensitivity analyses supported this result. The between-group difference in the incidence of serious adverse events was not significant (146 of 527 participants [27.7%] in the intravenous group and 138 of 527 [26.2%] in the oral group; P=0.58). Catheter complications, analyzed as a secondary end point, were more common in the intravenous group (9.4% vs. 1.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Oral antibiotic therapy was noninferior to intravenous antibiotic therapy when used during the first 6 weeks for complex orthopedic infection, as assessed by treatment failure at 1 year. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; OVIVA Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN91566927 .).

Tedizolid: a service evaluation in a large UK teaching hospital.

Tedizolid is a new oxazolidinone antibiotic with little real-life data on use outside of skin and soft tissue infections. There is a paucity of safety evidence in courses greater than 6 days. Our centre uses tedizolid predominantly when linezolid-associated adverse events have occurred. This service evaluation describes our experience to date. We performed a retrospective service evaluation by reviewing case notes, prescription charts, and laboratory system results for each patient prescribed tedizolid at our hospital and recording patient demographics, clinical details, and outcomes. Sixty patients received tedizolid between May 2016 and November 2018. Most were treated for bone or joint infections and had stopped linezolid prior to tedizolid prescription. Mean length of tedizolid therapy was 27 days. Haematological adverse effects were infrequent. Most patients (72%) finished the course and their clinical condition improved during treatment (72%). Adverse events were common, but often not thought to be tedizolid related. Tedizolid appears to be safe in prolonged courses within this context. It may be suitable for longer-term antibiotic therapy within a complex oral and parenteral outpatient antibiotic therapy (COPAT) service. Patients who do not tolerate linezolid can be safely switched to tedizolid if appropriate.

Recommended antimicrobial therapy for common inpatient infections: a comparative review of guidelines across 51 hospital trusts in England.

BACKGROUND: The number of different antimicrobial recommendations between hospital trusts for the same indication in England is unknown. AIM: We aimed to evaluate the heterogeneity of antimicrobial recommendations for seven common inpatient infections across hospital trusts in England and evaluate changes to recommendations following introduction of national (National Institute for Healthcare and Excellence, NICE) and international (WHO) antimicrobial guidelines. METHODS: Guidelines published on the MicroGuide smartphone application were collected from December 2017 to February 2018 and re-evaluated between December 2019 and February 2020. The following indications were assessed: community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) CURB65 score ≥3, hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), infective exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (iCOPD), cellulitis, uncomplicated urinary tract infection (uUTI), intra-abdominal infection (IAI) and sepsis of unknown source (SUS). On follow-up, compliance against WHO WATCH antibiotic and NICE recommendations was evaluated. RESULTS: Guidelines were obtained predominantly from England. Antibiotic regimens between hospitals became increasingly diverse across indications in the following order: uUTI, cellulitis, iCOPD, CAP, HAP, IAI and SUS. A piperacillin/tazobactam-based regimen was recommended in HAP (59%), SUS (39%) and IAI (30%). After 2 years, 107 changes were made to 357 antibiotic regimen recommendations; the overall number of regimens using piperacillin-tazobactam and WHO WATCH antibiotics remained similar. Compliance of recommendations with NICE guidelines as follows: iCOPD (100% adherent), uUTI (98%), cellulitis (90%), CAP (43%) and HAP (27%). CONCLUSION: The heterogeneity of antibiotic recommendations increased as the indicated infection was more severe, with broader underlying bacterial causes. Piperacillin-tazobactam remains favoured in antibiotic regimens, despite not recommended in WHO and NICE guidance.

Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

Development and impact of a massive open online course (MOOC) for antimicrobial stewardship.

Background: The University of Dundee and the BSAC developed a massive open online course (MOOC) to address the global need for education to support antimicrobial stewardship in low- and middle-income countries. Methods: An interactive course, Antimicrobial Stewardship: Managing Antibiotic Resistance, was developed and delivered via the FutureLearn© platform. The course ran over four 6 week periods during 2015 and 2016 supported by educators and was evaluated via data on uptake and feedback from learners on impact on clinical practice. Results: In total, 32 944 people, 70% of them healthcare professionals, from 163 countries joined the course from Europe (49%), Asia (16%), Africa (13%), North America (9%), Australia (8%) and South America (5%). Between 33% and 37% of joiners in each run completed at least one step in any week of the course and 219 participants responded to a post-course survey. The course was rated good or excellent by 208 (95%) of the participants, and 83 (38%) intended to implement stewardship interventions in their own setting. A follow-up survey 6 months later suggested that 49% had implemented such interventions. Conclusions: The MOOC has addressed a global learning need by providing education free at the point of access, and learning from its development will help others embarking upon similar educational solutions. Initial quantitative and qualitative feedback suggests it has engaged participants and complements traditional educational methods. Measuring its real impact on clinical practice remains a challenge. The FutureLearn© platform offers flexibility for MOOCs to be sustainable through modification to remove educator facilitation but maintain active participant discussion.

A survey of practice and opinions on the use of topical antibiotics to prevent surgical site infection: more confusion than consensus.

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common causes of healthcare-associated infection. Although the use of topical antibiotics to prevent SSI is not recommended by current guidelines, published studies document conflicting results and conclusions. Objectives: The objectives of this survey were to: (i) determine the extent of the use of topical antibiotics to prevent SSI in clinical practice; and (ii) gather the opinions of healthcare professionals most likely to be involved in their use. Methods: A questionnaire was circulated to members of BSAC and the European Wound Management Association (EWMA). Results: The questionnaire received 160 responses from a variety of healthcare professionals around the world. Most respondents (70%) did not have guidelines for the use of topical antibiotics for the prevention of SSI in their institution; if present, local guidance was based on national guidelines (20/31, 65%). Most respondents did not use or recommend topical antibiotics to prevent SSI; of those that did, gentamicin collagen sponges were most commonly used (24/96 responses, 25%). Over half of the surgeons (18/33, 55%) who responded to the survey did not use topical antibiotics for the prevention of SSI but, when used, contaminated surgery (8/33, 24%) was the most commonly stated indication. Conclusions: There are diverse opinions and practices among healthcare professionals about the use of topical antibiotics for the prevention of SSI. This considerable, and possibly inappropriate, variation in clinical practice needs to be addressed as part of antibiotic stewardship.

Guidelines for the diagnosis, prevention and management of implantable cardiac electronic device infection. Report of a joint Working Party project on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC, host organization), British Heart Rhythm Society (BHRS), British Cardiovascular Society (BCS), British Heart Valve Society (BHVS) and British Society for Echocardiography (BSE).

Infections related to implantable cardiac electronic devices (ICEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, are increasing in incidence in the USA and are likely to increase in the UK, because more devices are being implanted. These devices have both intravascular and extravascular components and infection can involve the generator, device leads and native cardiac structures or various combinations. ICED infections can be life-threatening, particularly when associated with endocardial infection, and all-cause mortality of up to 35% has been reported. Like infective endocarditis, ICED infections can be difficult to diagnose and manage. This guideline aims to (i) improve the quality of care provided to patients with ICEDs, (ii) provide an educational resource for all relevant healthcare professionals, (iii) encourage a multidisciplinary approach to ICED infection management, (iv) promote a standardized approach to the diagnosis, management, surveillance and prevention of ICED infection through pragmatic evidence-rated recommendations, and (v) advise on future research projects/audit. The guideline is intended to assist in the clinical care of patients with suspected or confirmed ICED infection in the UK, to inform local infection prevention and treatment policies and guidelines and to be used in the development of educational and training material by the relevant professional societies. The questions covered by the guideline are presented at the beginning of each section.

Molecular antimicrobial susceptibility testing in sepsis.

Rapidly detecting and identifying pathogens is crucial for appropriate antimicrobial therapy in patients with sepsis. Conventional diagnostic methods have been a great asset to medicine, though they are time consuming and labor intensive. This work will enable healthcare professionals to understand the bacterial community better and enhance their diagnostic capacity by using novel molecular methods that make obtaining quicker, more precise results possible. The authors discuss and critically assess the merits and drawbacks of molecular testing and the added value of these tests, including the shift turnaround time, the implication for clinicians' decisions, gaps in knowledge, future research directions and novel insights or innovations. The field of antimicrobial molecular testing has seen several novel insights and innovations to improve the diagnosis and management of infectious diseases.

Sepsis is a life-threatening reaction to an infection. This infection is normally caused by a bacteria. Identifying the bacteria that has caused the infection is very important to choosing the best treatment. This is usually done using molecular testing. This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of molecular testing, which tests are available and the value of these tests in clinical practice, the implication of molecular tests for clinicians' decisions and the gaps in our knowledge. It also discusses future innovations in molecular testing.

Biomarker Driven Antifungal Stewardship (BioDriveAFS) in acute leukaemia-a multi-centre randomised controlled trial to assess clinical and cost effectiveness: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute leukaemias (AL) are life-threatening blood cancers that can be potentially cured with treatment involving myelosuppressive, multiagent, intensive chemotherapy (IC). However, such treatment is associated with a risk of serious infection, in particular invasive fungal infection (IFI) associated with prolonged neutropenia. Current practice guidelines recommend primary antifungal (AF) prophylaxis to be administered to high-risk patients to reduce IFI incidence. AFs are also used empirically to manage prolonged neutropenic fever. Current strategies lead to substantial overuse of AFs. Galactomannan (GM) and ß-D-glucan (BG) biomarkers are also used to diagnose IFI. Combining both biomarkers may enhance the predictability of IFI compared to administering each test alone. Currently, no large-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) has directly compared a biomarker-based diagnostic screening strategy without AF prophylaxis to AF prophylaxis (without systematic biomarker testing). METHODS: BioDriveAFS is a multicentre, parallel, two-arm RCT of 404 participants from UK NHS Haematology departments. Participants will be allocated on a 1:1 basis to receive either a biomarker-based antifungal stewardship (AFS) strategy, or a prophylactic AF strategy, which includes existing standard of care (SoC). The co-primary outcomes will be AF exposure in the 12-month post randomisation and the patient-reported EQ-5D-5L measured at 12-month post randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include total AF exposure, probable/proven IFI, survival (all-cause mortality and IFI mortality), IFI treatment outcome, AF-associated adverse effects/events/complications, resource use, episodes of neutropenic fever requiring hospital admission or outpatient management, AF resistance in fungi (non-invasive and invasive) and a Desirability of Outcome Ranking. The trial will have an internal pilot phase during the first 9 months. A mixed methods process evaluation will be integrated in parallel to the internal pilot phase and full trial, aiming to robustly assess how the intervention is delivered. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be performed. DISCUSSION: The BioDriveAFS trial aims to further the knowledge of strategies that will safely optimise AF use through comparison of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a biomarker-led diagnostic strategy versus prophylactic AF to prevent and manage IFI within acute leukaemia. The evidence generated from the study will help inform global clinical practice and approaches within antifungal stewardship. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11633399. Registered 24/06/2022.

Potential value of a rapid syndromic multiplex PCR for the diagnosis of native and prosthetic joint infections: a real-world evidence study.

Introduction: The BIOFIRE Joint Infection (JI) Panel is a diagnostic tool that uses multiplex-PCR testing to detect microorganisms in synovial fluid specimens from patients suspected of having septic arthritis (SA) on native joints or prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Methods: A study was conducted across 34 clinical sites in 19 European and Middle Eastern countries from March 2021 to June 2022 to assess the effectiveness of the BIOFIRE JI Panel. Results: A total of 1527 samples were collected from patients suspected of SA or PJI, with an overall agreement of 88.4 % and 85 % respectively between the JI Panel and synovial fluid cultures (SFCs). The JI Panel detected more positive samples and microorganisms than SFC, with a notable difference on Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus species, Enterococcus faecalis, Kingella kingae, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and anaerobic bacteria. The study found that the BIOFIRE JI Panel has a high utility in the real-world clinical setting for suspected SA and PJI, providing diagnostic results in approximately 1 h. The user experience was positive, implying a potential benefit of rapidity of results' turnover in optimising patient management strategies. Conclusion: The study suggests that the BIOFIRE JI Panel could potentially optimise patient management and antimicrobial therapy, thus highlighting its importance in the clinical setting.

Surgical debridement in long bone chronic osteomyelitis: is wide tumour-like resection necessary?

Aims: The standard of wide tumour-like resection for chronic osteomyelitis (COM) has been challenged recently by adequate debridement. This paper reviews the evolution of surgical debridement for long bone COM, and presents the outcome of adequate debridement in a tertiary bone infection unit. Methods: We analyzed the retrospective record review from 2014 to 2020 of patients with long bone COM. All were managed by multidisciplinary infection team (MDT) protocol. Adequate debridement was employed for all cases, and no case of wide resection was included. Results: A total of 53 patients (54 bones) with median age of 45.5 years (interquartile range 31 to 55) and mean follow-up of 29 months (12 to 59) were included. In all, ten bones were Cierny-Mader type I, 39 were type III, and five were type IV. All patients were treated with single-staged management, except for one (planned two-stage stabilization). Positive microbial cultures grew in 75%. Overall, 46 cases (85%) had resolution of COM after index procedure, and 49 (90.7%) had resolution on last follow-up. Four patients (7%) underwent second surgical procedure and six patients (11%) had complications. Conclusion: We challenge the need for wide tumour-like resection in all cases of COM. Through detailed preoperative evaluation and planning with MDT approach, adequate debridement and local delivery of high concentration of antibiotic appears to provide comparable outcomes versus radical debridement.

A review of evidence for pneumococcal vaccination in adults at increased risk of pneumococcal disease: risk group definitions and optimization of vaccination coverage in the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumococcal disease (PD) significantly contributes to morbidity and mortality, carrying substantial economic and public health burden. This article is a targeted review of evidence for pneumococcal vaccination in the UK, the definitions of groups at particular risk of PD and vaccine effectiveness. AREAS COVERED: Relevant evidence focusing on UK data from surveillance systems, randomized controlled trials, observational studies and publicly available government documents is collated and reviewed. Selected global data are included where appropriate. EXPERT OPINION: National vaccination programs have reduced the incidence of vaccine-type PD, despite the rising prominence of non-vaccine serotypes in the UK. The introduction of higher-valency conjugate vaccines provides an opportunity to improve protection against PD for adults in risk groups. Several incentives are in place to encourage general practitioners to vaccinate risk groups, but uptake is low-suboptimal particularly among at-risk individuals. Wider awareness and understanding among the public and healthcare professionals may increase vaccination uptake and coverage. National strategies targeting organizational factors are urgently needed to achieve optimal access to vaccines. Finally, identifying new risk factors and approaches to risk assessment for PD are crucial to ensure those at risk of PD can benefit from pneumococcal vaccination.

Impact of adherence to individual quality-of-care indicators on the prognosis of bloodstream infection due to Staphylococcus aureus: a prospective observational multicentre cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the adherence and impact of quality-of-care indicators (QCIs) in the management of Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection in a prospective and multicentre cohort. METHODS: Analysis of the prospective, multicentre international S. Aureus Collaboration cohort of S. Aureus bloodstream infection cases observed between January 2013 and April 2015. Multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of adherence to QCIs on 90-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1784 cases were included. Overall, 90-day mortality was 29.9% and mean follow-up period was 118 days. Adherence was 67% (n = 1180/1762) for follow-up blood cultures, 31% (n = 416/1342) for early focus control, 77.6% (n = 546/704) for performance of echocardiography, 75.5% (n = 1348/1784) for adequacy of targeted antimicrobial therapy, 88.6% (n = 851/960) for adequacy of treatment duration in non-complicated bloodstream infections and 61.2% (n = 366/598) in complicated bloodstream infections. Full bundle adherence was 18.4% (n = 328/1784). After controlling for immortal time bias and potential confounders, focus control (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99; p 0.038) and adequate targeted antimicrobial therapy (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.91; p 0.004) were associated with low 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION: Adherence to QCIs in S. Aureus bloodstream infection did not reach expected rates. Apart from the benefits of application as a bundle, focus control and adequate targeted therapy were independently associated with low mortality.

PRO: Biomarker surveillance for invasive fungal infections without antifungal prophylaxis could safely reduce antifungal use in acute leukaemia.

Mould-active antifungal prophylaxis is frequently used to prevent invasive fungal infection in patients with acute leukaemia being treated with intensive chemotherapy. Invasive fungal infections are difficult to diagnose, and despite the use of prophylaxis a high proportion of patients still receive therapeutic antifungals. Antifungal medications have important interactions, can cause serious adverse events, and may drive the proliferation of antifungal resistance. The use of two biomarkers, such as galactomannan in combination with the less-specific ß-d-glucan, can mitigate the risk of not detecting non-Aspergillus species, as well as improving pooled sensitivity and specificity. We argue that regular biomarkers could be used safely as part of an antifungal stewardship strategy to reduce antifungal use, by both screening for infection in patients not on prophylaxis and ruling out infection in patients treated empirically.

Evaluation of in vitro activity of fosfomycin, and synergy in combination, in Gram-negative bloodstream infection isolates in a UK teaching hospital.

Introduction. Fosfomycin has retained activity against many multi-drug resistant (MDR) Gram-negatives, and may be useful against extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales to improve clinical outcomes.Hypothesis/Gap Statement. There are few data from the UK on the susceptibility of invasive Gram-negative isolates to fosfomycin, especially in the era of increasing use of oral fosfomycin for urinary tract infections (UTIs).Aim. We evaluated fosfomycin susceptibility against 100 consecutive Gram-negative bloodstream isolates, both individually, and in combination with other mechanistically similar and differing antibiotics. The aim was to investigate the synergy between antibiotic combinations against several E. coli, K. pneumoniae and P. aeruginosa isolates with variable levels of resistance.Methodology. Disc diffusion and MIC test strip methods applying revised EUCAST guidelines for Fosfomycin were used, followed by the MTS™ 'cross synergy' method for 'resistant' isolates as defined below: (a) Fosfomycin resistant by MIC test strip; (b) MDR isolates defined as being resistant to ≥3 classes of antibiotics (based on routine sensitivity testing; beta lactams were considered as a single class), and/or (c) AMP C or ESBL or carbapenemase producers (or carbapenem resistant). FIC Index (Fractional Inhibitory Concentration Index) calculations were used to interpret findings, whereby: FIC = (MICA combination A+B/ MIC agent A) + (MICB combination A+B/ MIC agent B). A result of ≤0.5 was taken to indicate 'synergy', >0.5 and ≤1.0 to indicate 'additive' effect, >1.0 and ≤4.0 to indicate 'indifference', and >4.0 to indicate 'antagonism'.Results. We found that 95/100 isolates were susceptible to fosfomycin by MIC test strip, with 88/100 isolates susceptible to fosfomycin by disc, based on EUCAST guideline breakpoints. A total of 30/100 isolates (the more 'resistant' of the 100) were eligible for synergy testing according to our definitions (see Methodology), with the remaining 70 isolates not tested further. Seventeen out of 30 were MDR, 2/30 were AMP C producers and 9/30 were ESBL producers. Overall, 34/300 (11 %) of all combination tests showed synergy and 161/300 (54 %) were additive. Synergy was most commonly detected between fosfomycin and beta-lactam antibiotics, including piperacillin/tazobactam (10/30; 33 %), ceftazidime/avibactam (10/30; 30 %), and temocillin (8/30; 27 %). An additive effect was most commonly detected with aztreonam (25/30; 83 %) and meropenem (25/30; 83 %), but 100 % indifference was found with tigecycline (30/30). No antagonism was identified with any antibiotic combination.Conclusion. Fosfomycin non-susceptibility by MIC test strip was unusual. Synergy was variable when combining fosfomycin with other antibiotics against the more 'resistant' isolates. Synergistic/additive effects were detected for beta-lactam/fosfomycin combinations in >80 % of all such combinations, suggesting beta-lactams may be the preferred partner for fosfomycin. Agents with a discordant site of action were more likely to result in indifference. Antagonism was not detected.

Case Report: The effect of intravenous and oral antibiotics on the gut microbiome and breath volatile organic compounds over one year.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global concern and better understanding of the gut microbiome, a known 'amplifier' of AMR, may allow future clinicians to tailor therapy to minimise this risk and offer a personalised medicine approach. To examine the gut microbiome, patients are required to provide faecal samples; more convenient and cheaper solutions need to be found. METHODS: As part of a pilot study looking at how routes of administration affect the gut microbiome in NHS patients undergoing routine clinical management for infections, we hypothesised that effects on the gut microbiome varied with the route and metabolism of antibiotic used, and these changes may be reflected in breath metabolites. We present a case report of a patient with an unusual clinical history, alongside breath metabolite and gut microbiome data taken before, during and after antibiotic therapy over a period of one year. RESULTS: We noted a shift in the dominant Bacteroides strain in the patient's gut microbiome between pre- and post-therapy samples, along with an alteration in the composition of breath metabolites. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a framework for similar future work and highlights the need for further research on the relationships between changes in microbial gut communities and antimicrobial exposure, patient clinical status, and the metabolites of human breath.

Misdiagnoses in the Context of Suspected Pandemic Influenza or Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review.

There have been numerous reports of patients initially misdiagnosed in the 2009 H1N1 influenza and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemics within the literature. A systematic review was undertaken to collate misdiagnoses during the H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics and identify which cognitive biases may contribute to this. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and MedRxiv databases were searched for misdiagnoses or cognitive biases resulting in misdiagnosis, occurring during the H1N1 or COVID-19 virus pandemics. Eligible studies were assessed for quality using JBI criteria; primary outcome was the final diagnosis. Sixty-nine studies involving 2551 participants were included. We identified 686 cases of misdiagnosis, categorized as viral respiratory infection, other respiratory infection, non-respiratory infection, and non-infective. Misdiagnoses are listed and relevant investigations are offered. No article described prospective assessment of decision making in the pandemic setting or debiasing diagnostic thinking. Further research is required to understand why misdiagnoses occur and harm arises and how clinicians can be assisted in their decision making in a pandemic context.