Factors associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia: a post hoc analysis from two prospective cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Almost one third of the patients with candidemia develop septic shock. The understanding why some patients do and others do not develop septic shock is very limited. The objective of this study was to identify variables associated with septic shock development in a large population of patients with candidemia. METHODS: A post hoc analysis was performed on two prospective, multicenter cohort of patients with candidemia from 12 hospitals in Spain and Italy. All episodes occurring from September 2016 to February 2018 were analyzed to assess variables associated with septic shock development defined according to The Third International Consensus Definition for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). RESULTS: Of 317 candidemic patients, 99 (31.2%) presented septic shock attributable to candidemia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identifies the following factors associated with septic shock development: age > 50 years (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.03-6.41, p = 0.04), abdominal source of the infection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.04-4.55, p = 0.04), and admission to a general ward at the time of candidemia onset (OR 0.21, 95% CI, 0.12-0.44, p = 0.001). Septic shock development was independently associated with a greater risk of 30-day mortality (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.08-4.24, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Age and abdominal source of the infection are the most important factors significantly associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia. Our findings suggest that host factors and source of the infection may be more important for development of septic shock than intrinsic virulence factors of organisms.

Active screening cultures to reduce infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) has emerged as a significant healthcare-associated infection carrying substantial mortality. We aimed to assess the clinical impact of active screening cultures for CRAB. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis, aiming to answer two questions: 1. Does screening vs no screening improve clinical outcomes? 2. Does positive screening ("CRAB carrier") predict CRAB infections? We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and conferences, until January 2024, comparative studies reporting clinical outcomes (mortality, invasive CRAB infections). RESULTS: Of 5,407 screened publications, 9 studies (10,865 individuals) were included for study question #2. Invasive CRAB infection rate was significantly higher among CRAB carriers (odds ratio [OR] 11.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.95-25.05, with substantial heterogeneity stemming from size rather than direction of the effect). Negative predictive value (NPV) of non-carriage for invasive infection was 97%. CRAB bloodstream infections rate was significantly higher among carriers (OR 16.23, 95% CI 2.9-110.08). No significant difference was demonstrated between the two groups CRAB ventilator-associated pneumonia, length of stay, and mortality. Only one study reported outcomes for the screening vs no screening (study question #1). CONCLUSIONS: Data to support active CRAB screening are scarce regarding its clinical benefit for patients. Positively screened patients are at significantly higher risk for invasive CRAB infections, with high NPV for non-carriage. This did not translate to reduced mortality.

Colonisation with Extended-Spectrum Cephalosporin-Resistant Enterobacterales and Infection Risk in Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Limited evidence has been reported for surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients undergoing surgery who are carriers of extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales (ESCR-E). A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the risk of postoperative infections in adult inpatients colonised with ESCR-E before surgery. METHODS: The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched between January 2011 and April 2022, following PRISMA indications. Random effects meta-analysis was used to quantify the association between ESCR-E colonisation and infection. RESULTS: Among the 467 articles reviewed, 9 observational studies encompassing 7219 adult patients undergoing surgery were included. The ESCR-E colonisation rate was 13.7% (95% CI 7.7-19.7). The most commonly reported surgeries included abdominal surgery (44%) and liver transplantation (LT; 33%). The SSI rate was 23.2% (95% CI 13.2-33.1). Pooled incidence risk was 0.36 (95% CI 0.22-0.50) vs 0.13 (95% CI 0.02-0.24) for any postoperative infection and 0.28 (95% CI 0.18-0.38) vs 0.17 (95% CI 0.07-0.26) for SSIs in ESCR-E carriers vs noncarriers, respectively. In ESCR-E carriers, the ESCR-E infection ratio was 7 times higher than noncarriers. Postoperative infection risk was higher in carriers versus noncarriers following LT. Sources of detected heterogeneity between studies included ESCR-E colonisation and the geographic region of origin. CONCLUSIONS: Patients colonised with ESCR-E before surgery had increased incidence rates of post-surgical infections and SSIs compared to noncarriers. Our results suggest considering the implementation of pre-surgical screening for detecting ESCR-E colonisation status according to the type of surgery and the local epidemiology.

Dalbavancin in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure and other infections: a safety evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Dalbavancin is a second-generation lipoglycopeptide approved since 2014 to treat acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI). Dalbavancin is characterized by Gram-positive activity and novel pharmacokinetic properties allowing prolonged terminal half-life andonce weekly dosing . A good safety profile was reported in clinical trials . AREAS COVERED: Dalbavancin safety and tolerability from trials and post-marketing studies were reviewed. While most reports included predominantly ABSSSI, two clinical trials and recent observational studies have explored the use of dalbavancin for off-label indications, mainly including bloodstream and osteoarticular infections. EXPERT OPINION: The occurrence of drug-related adverse effects (AE) was similar between dalbavancin and comparators in clinical trials enrolling patients with ABSSSI. Most common AE included gastrointestinal symptoms, infusion reaction, and hypersensitivity. Low rates of drug discontinuation and serious AE were reported across studies. In the past 5 years, several observational studies have reported safety data on the use of dalbavancin, confirming its favorable safety profile. Nevertheless, data from dalbavancin off-label use, often derived from prolonged (>2 weeks) treatments with variable dosing regimens, were mainly retrospective and lacked comparators. Further research is required to allow a reliable analysis of short- and long-term dalbavancin-related AE in non-ABSSSI.