A Dalbavancin for Successful Treatment of Infective Endocarditis Caused by Enterococcus faecalis.

Infective endocarditis is a relatively uncommon infection that requires a high index of suspicion, which can sometimes delay its diagnosis. It requires several weeks of intravenous antibiotics, which traditionally requires long hospital stays. Dalbavancin is a novel antibiotic with high activity against several Gram-positive pathogens. Its weekly administration allows the outpatient management of complicated infections requiring parenteral treatment, but only a few cases of Enterococcus faecalis endocarditis treated with dalbavancin have been reported in the literature. We here report a case of successful treatment with dalbavancin of an infectious endocarditis caused by E. faecalis. LEARNING POINTS: Infective endocarditis is a relatively uncommon infection that requires a high index of suspicion and its diagnosis can sometimes be challenging.Endovascular infections require long-term parenteral treatment, so outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is an option for stable patients in order to avoid prolonged hospital stays.Dalbavancin is a novel antibiotic with high activity against Gram-positive pathogens and can be administered weekly.There is growing experience in the ambulatory treatment of Gram-positive cocci endovascular infections.

The Use of Corticosteroids or Tocilizumab in COVID-19 Based on Inflammatory Markers.

BACKGROUND: The inflammatory cascade is the main cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Corticosteroids (CS) and tocilizumab (TCZ) are available to treat this escalation but which patients to administer it remains undefined. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immunosuppressive/anti-inflammatory therapy in COVID-19, based on the degree of inflammation. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study with data on patients collected and followed up from March 1st, 2020, to May 1st, 2021, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Patients under treatment with CS vs. those under CS plus TCZ were compared. Effectiveness was explored in 3 risk categories (low, intermediate, high) based on lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), ferritin, and D-dimer values. PATIENTS: A total of 21,962 patients were included in the Registry by May 2021. Of these, 5940 met the inclusion criteria for the present study (5332 were treated with CS and 608 with CS plus TCZ). MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were the composite variable of in-hospital mortality, requirement for high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or intensive care unit (ICU) admission. KEY RESULTS: A total of 5940 met the inclusion criteria for the present study (5332 were treated with CS and 608 with CS plus TCZ). No significant differences were observed in either the low/intermediate-risk category (1.5% vs. 7.4%, p=0.175) or the high-risk category (23.1% vs. 20%, p=0.223) after propensity score matching. A statistically significant lower mortality was observed in the very high-risk category (31.9% vs. 23.9%, p=0.049). CONCLUSIONS: The prescription of CS alone or in combination with TCZ should be based on the degrees of inflammation and reserve the CS plus TCZ combination for patients at high and especially very high risk.

Does timing matter on tocilizumab administration? Clinical, analytical and radiological outcomes in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: While there are no pharmacological treatments with proven efficacy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), tocilizumab has emerged as a candidate therapy. Some aspects of this therapy are still unknown, including the optimal timing of administration. OBJECTIVE: This observational study aimed to compare the 90-day mortality in two cohorts of patients when the drug was administered within the first 10 days from onset of symptoms or after day 11. METHODS: Patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who had received tocilizumab were divided into two groups according to when the medication was administered. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, clinical improvement on a 6-item scale by day 6, biomarker improvement by day 6, radiological image improvement by day 10 and SaO2 quotient by day 6. The results in the two groups were compared. Additionally, adverse events relating to tocilizumab were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were analysed. Both groups were epidemiologically comparable. The results obtained in the primary efficacy variable of the study (90-day mortality) showed a statistically significant difference in the subgroups according to the time of administration of tocilizumab (18.6% vs 5.0%, p=0.048). There was clinical improvement in 24.1% of patients at 6 days, with similar behaviour in both subgroups. No statistically significant differences were found in the percentage of patients who achieved radiological improvement at 10 days or in the other inflammatory parameters, with the exception of significant reductions in lactate dehydrogenase and C-reactive protein. Administration of tocilizumab was not associated with relevant adverse events. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first report of data regarding the timing of administration of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. A strategy involving tocilizumab administration after 10 days from onset of symptoms may decrease mortality. Further randomised controlled trials are needed to confirm this emerging hypothesis.

A case-control analysis of stroke in COVID-19 patients: Results of unusual manifestations of COVID-19-study 11.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the incidence, predictor variables, clinical characteristics, and stroke outcomes in patients with COVID-19 seen in emergency departments (EDs) before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with stroke during the COVID-19 outbreak in 62 Spanish EDs. We formed two control groups: COVID-19 patients without stroke (control A) and non-COVID-19 patients with stroke (control B). We compared disease characteristics and four outcomes between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 147 strokes in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 seen in EDs (1.96‰, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.66‰ to 2.31‰), being lower than in non-COVID-19 patients (6,541/1,388,879, 4.71‰, 95% CI = 4.60‰ to 4.83‰; odds ratio [OR] = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.49). The estimated that standardized incidences of stroke per 100,000 individuals per year were 124 and 133 for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 individuals, respectively (OR = 0.93 for COVID patients, 95% CI = 0.87 to 0.99). Baseline characteristics associated with a higher risk of stroke in COVID-19 patients were hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and previous cerebrovascular and coronary diseases. Clinically, these patients more frequently presented with confusion, decreased consciousness, and syncope and higher D-dimer concentrations and leukocyte count at ED arrival. After adjustment for age and sex, the case group had higher hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates (but not mortality) than COVID-19 controls without stroke (OR = 3.41, 95% CI = 1.27 to 9.16; and OR = 3.79, 95% CI = 1.69 to 8.50, respectively) and longer hospitalization and greater in-hospital mortality than stroke controls without COVID-19 (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.24 to 1.94; and OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.37 to 2.30, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of stroke in COVID-19 patients presenting to EDs was lower than that in the non-COVID-19 reference sample. COVID-19 patients with stroke had greater need for hospitalization and ICU admission than those without stroke and longer hospitalization and greater in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-19 patients with stroke.

A safe protocol to identify low-risk patients with COVID-19 pneumonia for outpatient management.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has made it necessary to rationalize health-care resources, but there is little published data at this moment regarding ambulatory management of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The objective of the study is to evaluate the performance of a protocol for ambulatory management of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia regarding readmissions, admission into the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and deaths. Also, to identify unfavorable prognostic factors that increase the risk of readmission. This is a prospective cohort study of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia discharged from the emergency ward of Infanta Cristina Hospital (Madrid, Spain) that met the criteria of the hospital protocol for outpatient management. We describe outcomes of those patients and compare those who needed readmission versus those who did not. We use logistic regression to explore factors associated with readmissions. A total of 314 patients were included, of which 20 (6.4%) needed readmission, and none needed ICU admission nor died. At least one comorbidity was present in 29.9% of patients. Hypertension, leukopenia, lymphocytopenia, increased lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and increased aminotransferases were all associated with a higher risk of readmission. A clinical course of 10 days or longer, and an absolute eosinophil count over 200/µL were associated with a lower risk. After the multivariate analysis, only hypertension (OR 4.99, CI 1.54-16.02), temperature over 38 °C in the emergency ward (OR 9.03, CI 1.89-45.77), leukopenia (OR 4.92, CI 1.42-17.11) and increased LDH (OR 6.62, CI 2.82-19.26) remained significantly associated with readmission. Outpatient management of patients with low-risk COVID-19 pneumonia is safe, if adequately selected. The protocol presented here has allowed avoiding 30% of the admissions for COVID-19 pneumonia in our hospital, with a very low readmission rate and no mortality.