Primary vesicoureteral reflux.

Primary vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) is one of the most common urological abnormalities in infants and children. The association of VUR, urinary tract infection (UTI) and renal parenchymal damage is well established. The most serious complications of VUR-associated reflux nephropathy are hypertension and proteinuria with chronic kidney disease. Over the past two decades, our understanding of the natural history of VUR has improved, which has helped to identify patients at increased risk of both VUR and VUR-associated renal injury. The main goals in the treatment of paediatric patients with VUR are the prevention of recurrent UTIs and minimizing the risk of renal scarring and long-term renal impairment. Currently, there are four options for managing primary VUR in infants and children: surveillance or intermittent treatment of UTIs with management of bladder and bowel dysfunction; continuous antibiotic prophylaxis; endoscopic subureteral injection of tissue-augmenting substances; and ureteral reimplantation via open, laparoscopic or robotic-assisted surgery. Current debates regarding key aspects of management include when to perform diagnostic imaging and how to best identify the paediatric patients that will benefit from continuous antibiotic prophylaxis or surgical intervention, including endoscopic injection therapy and minimally invasive ureteral reimplantation. Evolving technologies, such as artificial intelligence, have the potential to assist clinicians in the decision-making process and in the individualization of diagnostic imaging and treatment of infants and children with VUR in the future.

Impact of an enhanced anti-infection prophylaxis strategy for pancreatoduodenectomy: a single centre analysis.

INTRODUCTION : Surgical site infection (SSI) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is a significant concern. Targeted antibiotic prophylaxis (pAP) has been tested to mitigate antibiotic resistance patterns, especially after preoperative bile duct stenting. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of enhanced anti-infective prophylaxis (EAP) on the incidence of superficial and intraabdominal SSI. METHODS: All patients who underwent PD at a single centre between May 2018 and May 2021 were retrospectively analysed. A control cohort of patients who received pAP with intravenous cefuroxime and metronidazole and routine intraoperative abdominal lavage according to the surgeons' preferences. Since March 2020, pAP has been changed to piperacillin/tazobactam according to local resistance patterns and combined with routine intraoperative extended abdominal lavage (EIPL). Preoperative selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) has been applied routinely since Jan 2019. RESULTS: In total, 163 patients were included. The standard (n = 100) and EAP (n = 63) groups did not significantly differ with regard to pertinent patient and operative characteristics. In the EAP group, the rates of SSI (14% vs. 37%, p = 0.002, total rate: 28%) and urinary tract infection (24% vs. 8%, p = 0.011, total rate 18%) were significantly lower. Other septic complications were not significantly different. In addition, the risk of developing gastrointestinal bleeding and delayed gastric emptying was significantly lower in the EAP group. Multivariate analysis showed that an age > 67 years was a significant risk factor for SSI. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that enhanced anti-infective prophylaxis may significantly decrease the incidence of SSI in patients after PD.

Predictors for prolonged and escalated perioperative antibiotic therapy after microvascular head and neck reconstruction: a comprehensive analysis of 446 cases.

Literature suggests that intravenous prophylaxis exceeding 48 h offers no additional benefit in preventing surgical site infections (SSI) in patients with microvascular head and neck reconstruction. However, protocols for antibiotic therapy duration post-reconstruction are not standardized. This study identifies factors predicting prolonged intravenous antibiotic use and antibiotic escalation in patients receiving free flap head neck reconstruction. A retrospective analysis of 446 patients receiving free flap reconstruction was conducted, examining predictors for antibiotic therapy > 10 days and postoperative escalation. 111 patients (24.8%) experienced escalation, while 159 patients (35.6%) received prolonged therapy. Multivariate regression analysis revealed predictors for escalation: microvascular bone reconstruction (p = 0.008, OR = 2.0), clinically suspected SSI (p < 0.001, OR = 5.4), culture-positive SSI (p = 0.03, OR = 2.9), extended ICU stay (p = 0.01, OR = 1.1) and hospital-acquired pneumonia (p = 0.01, OR = 5.9). Prolonged therapy was associated with bone reconstruction (p = 0.06, OR = 2.0), preoperative irradiation (p = 0.001, OR = 1.9) and culture-positive SSI (p < 0.001, OR = 3.5). The study concludes that SSIs are a primary factor driving the escalation of perioperative antibiotic use. Clinical suspicion of infection often necessitates escalation, even in the absence of confirmed microbiological evidence. Microvascular bone reconstruction was a significant predictor for both the escalation and extension of antibiotic therapy beyond 10 days. Furthermore, preoperative radiation therapy, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and prolonged ICU stay were associated with an increased likelihood of escalation, resulting in significantly extended antibiotic administration during hospitalization. Antibiotic stewardship programmes must be implemented to reduce postoperative antibiotic administration time.Trial registration The study was registered approved by the local Ethics Committee (Nr: 18-1131-104).

Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Duration in Patients Undergoing Cystectomy With Urinary Diversion: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) reduces the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs). Guidelines recommend 24 hours or less of PAP for cystectomy with urinary diversion; however, evidence specifying optimal PAP duration for this surgery is lacking, and prolonged administration of PAP is common practice. Objective: To establish noninferiority of 24-hour PAP vs extended-duration PAP in preventing SSIs within 90 days after cystectomy with urinary diversion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was performed from April 18, 2018, to August 18, 2022, in patients aged older than 18 years undergoing elective open cystectomy with urinary diversion. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to administered drugs and inability to follow study procedures. Intervention: PAP administered for 24 hours (24-hour PAP group) vs PAP until all catheters and stents were removed (extended PAP group). Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was the rate of SSI, and the secondary end points included all-cause mortality, both within 90 days after surgery. Noninferiority of the 24-hour PAP treatment was assessed by comparing the 90% CI (corresponding to a significance level of α = .05) with the predefined noninferiority margin of 10%. Results: A total of 95 patients were randomly assigned to the 24-hour PAP group (median [IQR] age, 69.3 [63.1-76.8] years; 66 males [69.5%]) and 98 to the extended PAP group (median [IQR] age, 69.5 [60.8-75.5] years; 68 males [69.4%]). Patients in the 24-hour PAP group received PAP for a median of 1 day (IQR, 1-1 day), and patients in the extended PAP group received PAP for a median of 8 days (IQR, 7-10 days). No significant differences in SSIs occurring within 90 days were found (24-hour PAP group, 8 patients [8.4%]; extended PAP group, 12 patients [12.2%]; P = .53). The risk difference for 90-day cumulative SSI incidence was -3.8% (90% CI, -11.1% to 3.4%), establishing noninferiority of 24-hour PAP vs extended PAP to prevent SSI. Mortality was not significantly different between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this randomized clinical trial demonstrate noninferiority of 24-hour PAP vs extended-duration PAP in preventing SSIs within 90 days after cystectomy with urinary diversion and may contribute to antibiotic stewardship efforts in urology. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03305627.

Evaluation of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in clean-wound general surgery procedures: a propensity score-matched cohort study at a regional hospital.

BACKGROUND: The administration of antibiotic prophylaxis for clean-wound surgeries is controversial among surgeons, despite guidelines suggesting its use. This study aimed to evaluate its effectiveness in preventing surgical site infections (SSIs) in clean-wound surgeries within a regional setting with varied practices regarding prophylaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included four types of common general surgeries performed from March 2021 to February 2023 at a tertiary regional hospital in Thailand. The surgeries included skin/subcutaneous excision, thyroidectomy, inguinal hernia repair, and breast surgeries, all of which required regional or general anesthesia. Antibiotic prophylaxis was administered at the discretion of the attending surgeons. SSI diagnosis followed standard diagnostic criteria, involving reviewing medical records and the records of the infection control unit. Infection risk factors were examined. The primary outcome comparison used inverse probability treatment weighting of propensity scores, with covariate balance evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 501 surgeries identified, 84 were excluded, leaving 417 eligible for analysis. Among these patients, 233 received prophylactic antibiotics, for an SSI rate of 1.3%, while 184 did not receive antibiotics, for an SSI rate of 2.2%. A comparative analysis using propensity score weighting revealed no statistically significant difference in the incidence of SSI between the groups (risk ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.54 (0.11, 2.50), p = 0.427). CONCLUSION: In this practical setting, with the given study size, antibiotic prophylaxis in common general surgeries involving clean wounds did not significantly prevent SSIs. Routine use recommendations should be re-evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable as this study is a retrospective cohort study and not a clinical trial.

UROPOT: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind phase I/II trial for metabolism-based potentiation of antimicrobial prophylaxis in the urological tract.

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract catheters, including Double-J or ureteral stents, are prone to bacterial colonization forming biofilms and leading to asymptomatic bacteriuria. In the context of asymptomatic bacteriuria, endourological procedures causing mucosa-inducing lesions can lead to severe infections. Antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted, yet its efficacy is limited by biofilm formation on stents. Biofilms promote antibiotic tolerance, the capacity of genetically susceptible bacteria to survive a normally lethal dose of antimicrobial therapy. The UROPOT study evaluates the effectiveness of a first-in-type metabolism-based aminoglycoside potentiation for (i) preventing infectious complications of asymptomatic bacteriuria during mucosa lesion-inducing endourological procedures and (ii) assessing its anti-tolerance efficacy. METHODS: The UROPOT trial is a phase I/II single-center (Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), Switzerland) randomized double-blinded trial. Over 2 years, patients with asymptomatic Escherichia coli and/or Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteriuria, undergoing endourological procedures, will be randomly allocated to one of three treatment arms (1:1:1 randomization ratio, 30 patients per group) to evaluate the efficacy of mannitol-potentiated low-dose amikacin compared to established standard treatments (ceftriaxone or amikacin standard dose). Patients will be recruited at the CHUV Urology Outpatient Clinic. The primary outcome is the comparative incidence of postoperative urinary tract infections (assessed at 48 h) between the investigational amikacin/mannitol therapy and standard (ceftriaxone or amikacin) antibiotic prophylaxis, defined by specific systemic symptoms and/or positive blood and/or urine culture. Secondary outcomes include assessing microbiological eradication through anti-biofilm activity, sustained microbiological eradication, and mannitol and antibiotics pharmacokinetics in blood and urine. Safety outcomes will evaluate the incidence of adverse events following amikacin/mannitol therapy and postoperative surgical complications at postoperative day 14. DISCUSSION: UROPOT tests a novel antimicrobial strategy based on "metabolic potentiation" for prophylaxis enabling aminoglycoside dose reduction and targeting biofilm activity. The anti-biofilm effect may prove beneficial, particularly in patients who have a permanent stent in situ needing recurrent endourological manipulations strategies in preventing infections and achieving sustained microbiological eradication in pre-stented patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol is approved by the local ethics committee (CER-VD, 2023-01369, protocole 2.0) and the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic, 701,676) and is registered on the NIH's ClinicalTrials.gov (trial registration number: NCT05761405). Registered on March 07, 2023.

[Ten questions about infective endocarditis]. / Dieci quesiti in tema di endocardite infettiva.

Infective endocarditis (IE) is an infective process involving the endocardium and, more frequently, the native heart valves, valvular prostheses and cardiac implantable electronic devices. IE can manifest with various non-specific symptoms making the diagnosis challenging. This condition is associated with high in-hospital and long-term mortality. Therefore, it is particularly important to prevent it by implementing an adequate antibiotic prophylaxis especially in patients at high risk undergoing invasive procedures. Moreover, it is pivotal to promptly diagnose IE, detect the presence of local and systemic complications, establish appropriate antibiotic therapy and identify the indication and timing for surgical treatment. In this focused review, we will provide answers to the most common questions regarding the epidemiology, causes, prophylaxis, diagnosis and antibiotic and surgical treatment of IE.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Genitourinary Procedures in Patients with Artificial Joint Replacement and Artificial Heart Valves.

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) are uncommon but serious complications. According to current best practice statements, prior to a genitourinary procedure, patients with prosthetic joints should receive antibiotic prophylaxis if they are within 2 years of arthroplasty, if they are high risk for infection due to their individual comorbidities, or if the procedure poses a high risk for bacteremia. Patients with prosthetic valves should not receive antibiotic prophylaxis for the sole purpose of prevention of endocarditis. Enterococcus species are the uropathogens most often associated with PJI and PVE. Antibiotic selection should take into account local resistance patterns.

Preventing Infections After Prostate Biopsy: Prophylactic Antibiotics, Prebiopsy Rectal Culture, and Biopsy Approach.

Prostate biopsies are commonly performed for the early detection of prostate cancer and yet are associated with risks of life-threatening infections. Drug-resistant strains of Escherichia coli are the most common etiologic agents. Multiple maneuvers can reduce the risk of postbiopsy infections and sepsis during transrectal prostate biopsy including periprocedural empiric or targeted prophylactic antibiotics (based on previous rectal culture) and prebiopsy rectal cleansing with a povidone-iodine solution. The transperineal approach is associated with a very low risk of infection without requiring antibiotic prophylaxis.

Advances in Bowel Preparation and Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Open and Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) represent a major source of postoperative complications adversely impacting morbidity and mortality indices in surgical care. The discovery of antibiotics in the mid-20th century, and their ensuing use for preoperative antimicrobial bowel preparation and prophylaxis, drastically reduced the occurrence of SSIs providing a major tool to surgeons of various specialties, including urology. Because, the appropriate use of these antimicrobials is critical for their continued safety and efficacy, an understanding of the recommendations guiding their application is essential for all surgeons. Here, we comprehensively review these recommendations with a focus on open and laparoscopic urologic surgeries.

Update to the Neonatal Early-Onset Sepsis Calculator Utilizing a Contemporary Cohort.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Kaiser Permanente Neonatal Early-Onset Sepsis (EOS) Calculator has been an effective tool for risk stratification to safely reduce newborn antibiotic exposure. The calculator was derived from data on infants born between 1993 and 2007. Since that time, US obstetric practice has adopted universal antepartum screening for group B Streptococcus and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis guidance has changed. Our objective was to update the EOS calculator using a contemporary birth cohort and determine the effect of these changes on EOS case ascertainment and antibiotic recommendations. METHODS: The study included infants born at ≥35 weeks' gestation at 14 hospitals between January 2010 and December 2020 (n = 412 595 infants, EOS cases = 113). Model coefficients were re-estimated and the point estimates of the likelihood ratios for clinical status used to calculate the posterior probability of EOS. We compared the number of EOS cases correctly identified by each model (sensitivity) and the proportion of infants for whom empirical antibiotics are recommended. RESULTS: The original model had a sensitivity of 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.63-0.85), while the updated model had a sensitivity of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.68-0.89), P = .15. The recommended empirical antibiotic use was 3.5% with the original model and 3.7% with the updated model, P < .0001. For each additional case identified by the updated model, an additional 158 infants would be treated with antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Both the original and updated EOS calculators are effective tools for quantifying EOS risk among infants born at ≥35 weeks' gestation.

Reducing maternal infection after assisted vaginal birth in a diverse and deprived population.

Postpartum maternal sepsis is a leading cause of maternal mortality and morbidity. A single dose of prophylactic antibiotics following assisted vaginal births has been shown to significantly reduce postpartum maternal infection in a landmark multicentre randomised controlled trial, which led to its national recommendation. This project aimed to improve the local implementation of prophylactic antibiotics following assisted vaginal births to reduce postnatal maternal infections.Using a prospectively collated birth register, data were collected retrospectively on prophylactic antibiotics administration and postnatal maternal infection rates after assisted vaginal births at the Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals National Health Service Trust in North-West Birmingham of the UK. The data were collected from routinely used electronic health records over three audit cycles (n=287) between 2020 and 2023.A mixed-method approach was used to improve the use of prophylactic antibiotics: (1) evidence-based journal clubs targeting doctors in training, (2) presentations of results after all three audit cycles at our and (3) expedited a formal change of local guidelines to support prophylactic antibiotics use.Prophylactic antibiotic administration increased from 13.2% (December 2021) to 90.7% (July 2023), associated with a reduction in maternal infection rates (18.2% when prophylaxis was given vs 22.2% when no prophylaxis was given). However, we observed a gradual increase in the overall postnatal maternal infection rates during the project period.Our repeat audit identified prophylactic antibiotics were regularly omitted after deliveries in labour ward rooms (59.3%), compared with 100% of those achieved in theatre. After further interventions, prophylactic antibiotics administration rates were comparable between these clinical areas (>90%) in 2023.Together, we have demonstrated a simple set of interventions that induced sustainable changes in practice. Further evaluation of other modifiable risk factors and infection rates following all deliveries is warranted in view of the gradual increase in the overall postnatal maternal infection rates.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of surgical site infections following colorectal surgery: protocol for network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections continue to be a significant challenge following colorectal surgery. These can result in extended hospital stays, hospital readmissions, increased treatment costs, and negative effects on patients' quality of life. Antibiotic prophylaxis plays a crucial role in preventing infection during surgery, specifically in preventing surgical site infections after colorectal surgery in adult patients. However, the optimal antibiotic regimen is still unclear based on current evidence. Considering the limitations of existing reviews, our goal is to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of available antibiotic prophylaxis regimens for preventing surgical site infections following colorectal surgery in adult patients. METHODS: We will search the Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. We will include trials that (1) enrolled adults who underwent colorectal surgeries and (2) randomized them to any systemic administration of antibiotic (single or combined) prophylaxis before surgery compared to an alternative systemic antibiotic (single or combined antibiotic), placebo, control, or no prophylactic treatment. Pairs of reviewers will independently assess the risk of bias among eligible trials using a modified Cochrane risk of bias instrument for randomized trials. Our outcomes of interest include the rate of surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, hospital length of stay, 30-day mortality, and treatment-related adverse effects. We will perform a contrast-based network meta-analysis using a frequentist random-effects model assuming a common heterogeneity parameter. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be utilized to assess the certainty of evidence for treatment effects. DISCUSSION: By synthesizing evidence from available RCTs, this study will provide valuable insight for clinicians, patients, and health policymakers on the most effective antibiotics for preventing surgical site infection. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023434544.

Extended Postoperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Is Associated with No Clinical Value and Higher Projected Cost Following Adult Spinal Surgery: A Stratified Meta-Analysis and Probability-Based Cost Projections.

¼ We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of different protocols of extended postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (E-PAP) following adult spinal surgery.¼ Both stratified (randomized controlled trials only) and nonstratified (all studies) analyses demonstrated that E-PAP has no significant value in reducing the rate of surgical site infection (SSI), deep SSI, or superficial SSI.¼ Notably, the E-PAP protocols were associated with a significant increase in the length of hospital stay, resulting in an additional expenditure of $244.4 per episode for the E-PAP 72 hours protocol compared with PAP 24 hours and $309.8 per episode for the E-PAP >48 hours protocol compared with PAP <48 hours.¼ E-PAP does not demonstrate any significant reduction in the rate of SSIs following spine surgery. However, these extended protocols were significantly associated with an increase in the length of hospital stay and higher overall projected costs.

Long-term antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of rheumatic fever recurrence and progression to rheumatic heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic fever is a non-suppurative, inflammatory sequela of group A Streptococcus pharyngitis that can occur at two to four weeks after infection. Following an episode of rheumatic fever, there is a risk of developing rheumatic heart disease (RHD) later in life that carries significant risk of morbidity and mortality. RHD remains the largest global cause of cardiovascular disease in the young (age < 25 years). The historical literature provides inconclusive evidence that antibiotic prophylaxis is beneficial in reducing the risk of recurrence of rheumatic fever and development of RHD. Antibiotics are thought to work by reducing the carriage of group A Streptococcus and thus reducing the risk of infection. This review was commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO) for an upcoming guideline. OBJECTIVES: 1. To assess the effects of long-term antibiotics versus no antibiotics (control) for secondary prevention of rheumatic fever recurrence and associated sequelae in people with previous rheumatic fever or RHD. 2. To assess the effects of long-term intramuscular penicillin versus long-term oral antibiotics for secondary prevention of rheumatic fever recurrence and associated sequelae in people with previous rheumatic fever or RHD. SEARCH METHODS: We systematically searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, clinical trial registers, ISRCTN.com and reference lists without restrictions on language or date up to 10 March 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials, described in any language, including participants with previous rheumatic fever and/or RHD of any age, based in community or hospital settings. Studies were included if they compared firstly antibiotic prophylaxis with no antibiotic prophylaxis, and, secondly, intramuscular penicillin prophylaxis versus oral antibiotic prophylaxis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standardised methodological, Cochrane-endorsed procedures and performed meta-analyses with risk ratios (RR) and Peto odds ratios (Peto OR). Our primary outcomes were recurrence of rheumatic fever, progression or severity of RHD and cardiac complications. Our secondary outcomes were obstetric complications (maternal and foetal events), mortality, treatment adherence, adverse events and acceptability to participants. We performed comprehensive assessments of risk of bias and certainty of evidence, applying the GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 studies (seven RCTs and four quasi-randomised trials) including 3951 participants. The majority of the included studies were conducted in the USA, UK and Canada during the 1950s to 1960s. Most participants with previous rheumatic fever had been diagnosed using the modified Jones criteria (mJC) (four studies), were an average of 12.3 years of age and 50.6% male. We assessed the majority of the included studies to be at high risk of bias, predominantly relating to blinding and attrition bias. Comparison one: antibiotics versus no antibiotics Pooled meta-analysis of six RCTs provides moderate-certainty evidence that antibiotics overall (oral or intramuscular) probably reduce the risk of recurrence of rheumatic fever substantially (0.7% versus 1.7%, respectively) (risk ratio (RR) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.69; 1721 participants). People with early or mild RHD likely have the greatest capacity to benefit from intramuscular antibiotic prophylaxis (8.1%) compared to no antibiotics (0.7%) (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.29; 1 study, 818 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may not affect mortality in people with late-stage RHD (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.94; 1 study, 994 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may not affect the risk of anaphylaxis (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 372; 1 study, 818 participants; low-certainty evidence) or sciatic nerve injury (Peto OR 7.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 372; 1 study, 818 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared with no antibiotics, but probably have an increased risk of hypersensitivity reactions (RR 137, 8.51 to 2210; 2 studies, 894 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and local reactions (RR 29, 1.74 to 485; 1 study, 818 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Comparison two: intramuscular antibiotics versus oral antibiotics Pooled analysis of two RCTs showed that prophylactic intramuscular benzathine benzylpenicillin likely reduces recurrence of rheumatic fever substantially when compared to oral antibiotics (0.1% versus 1%, respectively) (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.26; 395 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Furthermore, it is unclear whether intramuscular benzyl penicillin is superior to oral antibiotics in reducing the risk of mortality in the context of RHD (Peto OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.12; 1 study, 431 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no data available on progression of latent RHD or adverse events including anaphylaxis, sciatic nerve injury, delayed hypersensitivity/allergic reactions and local reactions to injection. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence that antibiotic prophylaxis likely reduces the risk of recurrence of rheumatic fever compared to no antibiotics, and that intramuscular benzathine benzylpenicillin is probably superior to oral antibiotics (approximately 10 times better). Moreover, intramuscular benzathine benzylpenicillin likely reduces the risk of progression of latent RHD. Evidence is scarce, but antibiotics compared with no antibiotics may not affect the risk of anaphylaxis or sciatic nerve injury, but probably carry an increased risk of hypersensitivity reactions and local reactions. Antibiotics may not affect all-cause mortality in late-stage RHD compared to no antibiotics. There is no evidence available to comment on the effect of intramuscular penicillin over oral antibiotics for progression of latent RHD and adverse events, and little evidence for all-cause mortality. It is important to interpret these findings in the context of major limitations, including the following: the vast majority of the included studies were conducted more than 50 years ago, many before contemporary echocardiographic studies; methodology was often at high risk of bias; outdated treatments were used; only one study was in latent RHD; and there are concerns regarding generalisability to low socioeconomic regions. This underlines the need for ongoing research to understand who benefits most from prophylaxis.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Lung Transplant: Single-Center Cohort Study.

Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in lung transplant recipients (LuTRs) has high heterogeneity between centers. Our aim was to investigate retrospectively the approach to PAP in our center over a 20-year period (2002-2023), and its impact on early post-operative infections (EPOIs) after lung transplantation (LuT). Primary endpoint was diagnosis of EPOI, defined as any bacterial infection including donor-derived events diagnosed within 30 days from LuT. Main exposure variables were type of PAP (combination vs. monotherapy) and PAP duration. We enrolled 111 LuTRs. PAP consisted of single-agent or combination regimens in 26 (25.2%) and 85 (74.8%) LuTR. Median PAP duration was 10 days (IQR 6-13) days. Piperacillin/tazobactam was the most common agent used either as monotherapy (n = 21, 80.7%) or as combination with levofloxacin (n = 79, 92.9%). EPOIs were diagnosed in 30 (27%) patients. At multivariable analysis no advantages were found for combination regimens compared to single-agent PAP in preventing EPOI (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.488-5.068, p:0.448). The impact of PAP duration on EPOIs development was investigated including duration of PAP ≤6 days as main exposure variables, without finding a significantly impact (OR:2.165, 95% CI: 0.596-7.863, p: 0.240). Our results suggest no advantages for combination regimens PAP in preventing EPOI in LuTR.

How can we reduce neonatal sepsis after universal group B streptococcus screening?

BACKGROUND: Group B Streptococcus (GBS) infection remains a leading cause of newborn morbidity and mortality. The study aimed to determine the adherence rate to the universal screening policy a decade after its introduction. Secondly, whether the timing of antibiotics given in GBS carriers reduces the incidence of neonatal sepsis. METHODS: Delivery records at Hong Kong Baptist Hospital in 2022 were examined to retrieve antenatal and intrapartum details regarding maternal GBS carrier status, previous maternal GBS carrier status, antibiotic treatment, timing of treatment, neonatal condition at birth and whether the neonate had sepsis. Univariate statistics was used to assess the relationship between maternal GBS carrier and neonatal sepsis overall. Incidence of neonatal sepsis was stratified according to mode of delivery and timing of antibiotic. RESULTS: The adherence rate to the universal GBS screening policy was 97%. The risk of neonatal sepsis was 5.45 (95% CI 3.05 to 9.75) times higher in women who were GBS screened positive when compared to non-GBS carriers (p < 0.001). Amongst term neonates from GBS carriers delivered by Caesarean section, the risk of neonatal sepsis significantly decreased by 70% after antenatal antibiotic treatment (p = 0.041) whereas in term neonates delivered vaginally, the risk of neonatal sepsis decreased by 71% (p = 0.022) if intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis was given 4 or more hours. CONCLUSION: Giving antenatal antibiotic treatment before Caesarean section or intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for 4 or more hours before vaginal delivery may decrease the risk of neonatal sepsis in term neonates delivered from GBS carriers.

Group B streptococcus colonization in pregnancy and neonatal outcomes: a three-year monocentric retrospective study during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is a major cause of sepsis and meningitis in newborns. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends to pregnant women, between 35 and 37 weeks of gestation, universal vaginal-rectal screening for GBS colonization, aimed at intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP). The latter is the only currently available and highly effective method against early onset GBS neonatal infections. Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the preventive measures implemented to mitigate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection led to the reduction in the access to many health facilities and services, including the obstetric and perinatal ones. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the prevalence of maternal GBS colonization, as well as use of IAP and incidence of episodes of neonatal GBS infection when antibiotic prophylaxis has not been carried out in colonized and/or at risk subjects, in a population of pregnant women during (years 2020-2021) and after (year 2022) the COVID-19 pandemic, also with the aim to establish possible epidemiological and clinical differences in the two subjects' groups. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of pregnant women admitted to, and delivering, at the Gynaecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Sciences for Health Promotion and Mother and Child Care, of the University Hospital of Palermo, Italy, from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2022. For each of them, we recorded pertinent socio-demographic information, clinical data related to pregnancy, delivery and peripartum, and specifically execution and status of vaginal and rectal swab test for GBS detection, along with eventual administration and modality of IAP. The neonatal outcome was investigated in all cases at risk (positive maternal swabs status for GBS, either vaginal or rectal, with or without/incomplete IAP, preterm labor and/or delivery, premature rupture of membranes ≥ 18 h, previous pregnancy ended with neonatal early onset GBS disease [EOD], urine culture positive for GBS in any trimester of current gestation, intrapartum temperature ≥ 38 °C and/or any clinical/laboratory signs of suspected chorioamnionitis). The data concerning mothers and neonates at risk, observed during the pandemic (years 2020-2021), were compared with those of both subjects' groups with overlapping risk factors recorded in the following period (year 2022). The chi squared test has been applied in order to find out the relationship between pregnant women with GBS colonization receiving IAP and outcome of their neonates. RESULTS: The total source population of the study consisted of 2109 pregnant women, in addition to their 2144 newborns. Our analysis, however, focused on women and neonates with risk factors. The vaginal-rectal swab for GBS was performed in 1559 (73.92%) individuals. The test resulted positive in 178 cases overall (11.42% of those undergoing the screening). Amongst our whole sample of 2109 subjects, 298 women had an indication for IAP (vaginal and/or rectal GBS colonization, previous pregnancy ended with neonatal GBS EOD, urine culture positive for GBS in any trimester of current gestation, and unknown GBS status at labor onset with at least any among delivery at < 37 weeks' gestation, amniotic membranes rupture ≥ 18 h and/or intrapartum temperature ≥ 38.0 °C), and 64 (21.48%) received adequate treatment; for 23 (7.72%) it was inadequate/incomplete, while 211 (70.8%) did not receive IAP despite maternal GBS colonization and/or the presence of any of the above mentioned risk factors. Comparing the frequency of performing vaginal-rectal swabs in the women admitted in the two time periods, the quote of those screened out of the total in the pandemic period (years 2020-2021) was higher than that of those undergoing GBS screening out of the total admitted in the year 2022 (75.65% vs. 70.38%, p = 0.009), while a greater number (not statistically significant, p = 0.12) of adequate and complete IAP was conducted in 2022, than in the previous biennium (26.36 vs. 18.62%). During the whole 3 years study period, as expected, none of the newborns of mothers with GBS colonization and/or risk factors receiving IAP developed EOD. Conversely, 13 neonates with EOD, out of 179 (7.3%) born to mothers with risk factors, were observed: 3 among these patients' mothers performed incomplete IAP, while the other 10 did not receive IAP. Neither cases of neonatal meningitis, nor deaths were observed. The incidence rate in the full triennium under investigation, estimated as the ratio between the number of babies developing the disease out of the total of 2144 newborns, was 6.06‰; among those born to mothers with risk factors, if comparing the two time periods, the incidence was 8.06% in the pandemic biennium, while 5.45% in the following year, evidencing thus no statistical significance (p = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: The present study revealed in our Department an increased prevalence of pregnant women screened for, and colonized by GBS, in the last decade. However, an overall still low frequency of vaginal-rectal swabs performed for GBS, and low number of adequate and complete IAP despite the presence of risk factors have been found, which did not notably change during the two time periods. Moreover, significant EOD incidence rates have been reported among children of mothers carrying risk factors, although also in this case no statistically significant differences have been observed during and after the pandemic. Such data seem to be in contrast to those reported during the COVID-19, showing a decrease in the access to health facilities and increased mortality/morbidity rates also due to the restrictive measures adopted to mitigate the effects of the pandemic. These findings might be explained by the presence within the same metropolitan area of our Department of a COVID hospital and birthing center, which all the patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection referred to, and likely leading to a weaker concern of getting sick perceived by our patients. Although IAP is an easy procedure to implement, however adherence and uniformity in the management protocols are still not optimal. Therefore, the prophylactic measures adopted to date cannot be considered fully satisfactory, and should be improved. Better skills integration and obstetrical-neonatological collaboration, in addition to new effective preventive tools, like vaccines able to prevent invasive disease, may allow further reduction in morbidity and mortality rates related to GBS perinatal infection.

Risk factor for inappropriate use of prophylactic antibiotics in inguinal hernia repair surgery.

INTRODUCTION: There are some complications that can arise after surgery, like surgical site infection (SSI). In hernia repair, SSI incidence is low. Hence, the clinical practice guideline (CPG) published by the HerniaSurge Group (THG) does not recommend prophylactic antibiotics for hernia repair. Despite the unnecessary use of prophylactic antibiotics, regarding patient safety, prophylactic antibiotics can be used. However, each hospital has its own CPG and recommended antimicrobials based on the infection cases in its site. Regarding antimicrobial resistances, evaluating prophylactic antibiotics is essential to prevent increasing incidence of antimicrobial resistance cases. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use of prophylactic antibiotics in hernia inguinal cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional analytic study used patients' medical records between 2015 to 2020. Demographic data, surgery data and the used antimicrobial data were extracted and written in case report form. Identification of risk factors for inappropriate use of prophylactic antibiotics was done using logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 55 inappropriate times of preoperative prophylactic antibiotic therapy cases out of 80 cases and 63 cases in post-operative antibiotics were different from the guideline. Statistical analysis did not find any factor related to inappropriate therapy time. CONCLUSION: The misuse of prophylactic antibiotics was frequently found regarding the duration of prophylactic antibiotics in both pre- and post-surgery setting. Nonetheless, no risk factor was identified with the inappropriate use of prophylactic antibiotics.