Capnocytophaga canimorsus Mycotic Aortic Aneurysm After a Dog Bite.

Introduction: Mycotic aortic aneurysm is defined as dilatation of the aortic wall due to infection caused by a variety of microorganisms and is associated with high mortality rates. This case report describes a patient with a rapid growing mycotic infrarenal aneurysm caused by Capnocytophaga canimorsus following a dog bite. Report: A 61 year old male professional dog handler presented with a history of progressive abdominal pain and constitutional symptoms. He had been bitten by a Pit Bull Terrier dog that was attacking a young girl three weeks prior to the onset of complaints. Investigations revealed a mycotic infrarenal aortic aneurysm that grew 0.5 cm in only three days. Open surgical repair consisting of an infrarenal aorto-aortic bypass with a 21 mm × 15 cm bovine bioprosthesis was performed successfully. All cultures and biopsies were negative and the subsequent 16S-23S rRNA intergenic spacer region based polymerase chain reaction (IS-pro) technique revealed C. canimorsus, a Gram negative bacterial pathogen that lives as a commensal in the gingival flora of dogs and cats that can cause a variety of severe infections, as the causative agent. Identification made it possible to treat the patient with eight weeks of intravenous followed by four weeks of oral antibiotics. At the last follow up over a year after surgery, the patient was symptom free, without infection and on ultrasound examination there were no signs of complications or aneurysm formation. Discussion: This case highlights C. canimorsus as a rare cause of a rapid growing mycotic aortic aneurysm following a dog bite. 16S-23S rRNA profiling (IS-pro) led to the identification of the bacterial pathogen. The use of biological grafts should be considered in the management of mycotic aortic aneurysms.

Clinical characteristics and risk factors of preventable hospital readmissions within 30 days.

Knowledge regarding preventable hospital readmissions is scarce. Our aim was to compare the clinical characteristics of potentially preventable readmissions (PPRs) with non-PPRs. Additionally, we aimed to identify risk factors for PPRs. Our study included readmissions within 30 days after discharge from 1 of 7 hospital departments. Preventability was assessed by multidisciplinary meetings. Characteristics of the readmissions were collected and 23 risk factors were analyzed. Of the 1120 readmissions, 125 (11%) were PPRs. PPRs occurred equally among different departments (p = 0.21). 29.6% of PPRs were readmitted by a practitioner of a different medical specialty than the initial admission (IA) specialist. The PPR group had more readmissions within 7 days (PPR 54% vs. non-PPR 44%, p = 0.03). The median LOS was 1 day longer for PPRs (p = 0.16). Factors associated with PPR were higher age (p = 0.004), higher socio-economic status (p = 0.049), fewer prior hospital admissions (p = 0.004), and no outpatient visit prior to readmission (p = 0.025). This study found that PPRs can occur at any department in the hospital. There is not a single type of patient that can easily be pinpointed to be at risk of a PPR, probably due to the multifactorial nature of PPRs.

Preventability of unplanned readmissions within 30 days of discharge. A cross-sectional, single-center study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the preventability, determinants and causes of unplanned hospital readmissions within 30 days of discharge using a multidisciplinary approach and including patients' perspectives. DESIGN: A prospective cross-sectional single-center study. SETTING: Urban teaching hospital in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 430 patients were included. Inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 18 years, discharged from one of seven participating clinical departments and an unplanned readmission within 30 days. METHODS: Residents from the participating departments individually assessed whether the readmission was caused by healthcare, the preventability and possible causes of readmissions using a tool. Thereafter, the preventability of the cases was discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting with residents of all participating departments and clinical pharmacists. The primary outcome was the proportion of readmissions that were potentially preventable. Secondary outcomes were the determinants for a readmission, causes for preventable readmissions, the change in the final decision on preventability after the multidisciplinary meeting and the value of patient interviews in assessing preventability. Differences in characteristics of potentially preventable readmissions (PPRs) and non-PPRs were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 430 readmissions, 56 (13%) were assessed as PPRs. Age was significantly associated with a PPR (adjusted OR: 2.42; 95%, CI 1.23-4.74; p = 0.01). The main causes for PPRs were diagnostic (30%), medication (27%) and management problems (27%). During the multidisciplinary meeting, the final decision on preventability changed in 11% of the cases. When a patient interview was available, it was used as a source of information to assess preventability in 26% of readmissions. In 7% of cases, the patient interview was mentioned as the most important source. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: 13% of readmissions were potentially preventable with diagnostic, medication or management problems being main causes. A multidisciplinary review approach and including the patient's perspective could contribute to a better understanding of the complexity of readmissions and possible improvements.