Risk of endocarditis among patients with coagulase-negative Staphylococcus bacteremia.

Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are currently considered typical microorganisms causing infective endocarditis (IE) in patients with prosthetic valves. The objective was to determine variables associated with IE in patients with CoNS bacteremia. We performed an analysis of the clinical characteristics of patients with CoNS bacteremia admitted to a university hospital in Madrid (Spain) from 2021 to December 2022 according to the occurrence of IE. This study is an evaluation of a bacteremia registry. During the study period, 106 patients with CoNS bacteremia were detected. In 85 patients an echocardiogram was performed during hospital admission to rule out IE. Among them, 12 episodes were detected that met IE criteria (14.2%). Of the 6 patients with heart valve prostheses, 5 patients (83.3%) had IE (p < 0.001). Patients with IE more frequently had positive blood cultures more than 12 h after the first draw (58.3% versus 13.4%; p < 0.001). There was a tendency to associate community-acquired bacteremia and to that all blood culture bottles obtained were positive with an increased risk of IE (p = 0.091 and p = 0,057, respectively). Attributable mortality to infection was higher in patients with IE relative to all other patients (16.7% vs. 0%; p = 0.033). The multivariable analysis included having valve prosthesis and persistent bacteremia for more than 12 h. Both were independently associated with IE: valve prosthesis OR 38.6 (95% CI 5.8-258; p < 0.001) and persistent bacteremia OR 2.6 (95% CI 1.1-6.8; p = 0.046). In conclusion, a high percentage of cases of CoNS bacteremia may be due to IE. Some of the variables related to a higher risk of IE, such as having a valvular prosthesis or presenting positive blood cultures for more than 12 h, should lead to rule out or confirm the presence of IE by performing echocardiography.

Impact of lung ultrasound during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Distinction between viral and bacterial pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: Lung Ultrasound is an accessible, low-cost technique that has demonstrated its usefulness in the prognostic stratification of COVID-19 patients. In addition, according to previous studies, it can guide us towards the potential aetiology, especially in epidemic situations such as the current one. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 40 patients were prospectively recruited, 30 with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and 10 with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The patients included underwent both a chest X-ray and ultrasound. RESULTS: There were no differences in the 2 groups in terms of clinical and laboratory characteristics. The main ultrasound findings in the SARS-CoV-2 group were the presence of confluent B lines and subpleural consolidations and hepatinization in the CAP group. Pleural effusion was more frequent in the CAP group. There were no normal lung ultrasound exams. Analysis of the area under the curve (AUC) curves showed an area under the curve for Lung Ultrasound of 89.2% (95% CI: 75%.0-100%, p < .001) in the identification of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The cut-off value for the lung score of 10 had a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 80.0% (p < .001). DISCUSSION: The combination of the findings of the Lung Ultrasound, with a Lung Score greater than 10, added to the rest of the additional tests, can be an excellent tool to predict the aetiology of the pneumonia.

[Impact of Lung Ultrasound dUring the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Distinction Between Viral and Bacterial Pneumonia]. / Impacto de la ecografía pulmonar Durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2: distinción entre la neumonía viral y la bacteriana.

Introduction: Lung ultrasound is an accessible, low-cost technique that has demonstrated its usefulness in the prognostic stratification of COVID-19 patients. In addition, according to previous studies, it can guide us towards the potential aetiology, especially in epidemic situations such as the current one. Patients and methods: 40 patients were prospectively recruited, 30 with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and 10 with community-acquired pneumonia. The patients included underwent both a chest X-ray and ultrasound. Results: There were no differences in the 2 groups in terms of clinical and laboratory characteristics. The main ultrasound findings in the SARS-CoV-2 group were the presence of confluent B lines and subpleural consolidations and hepatinization in the community-acquired pneumonia group. Pleural effusion was more frequent in the community-acquired pneumonia group. There were no normal lung ultrasound exams. Analysis of the area under the curve curves showed an area under the curve for lung ultrasound of 89.2% (95% CI: 75.0-100%, p < .001) in the identification of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The cut-off value for the lung score of 10 had a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 80.0% (p < .001). Discussion: The combination of the findings of the lung ultrasound, with a lung score greater than 10, added to the rest of the additional tests, can be an excellent tool to predict the aetiology of the pneumonia.