Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
J Clin Microbiol ; 58(8)2020 Jul 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32404482

RESUMEN

A surge of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting to New York City hospitals in March 2020 led to a sharp increase in blood culture utilization, which overwhelmed the capacity of automated blood culture instruments. We sought to evaluate the utilization and diagnostic yield of blood cultures during the COVID-19 pandemic to determine prevalence and common etiologies of bacteremia and to inform a diagnostic approach to relieve blood culture overutilization. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 88,201 blood cultures from 28,011 patients at a multicenter network of hospitals within New York City to evaluate order volume, positivity rate, time to positivity, and etiologies of positive cultures in COVID-19. Ordering volume increased by 34.8% in the second half of March 2020 compared to the level in the first half of the month. The rate of bacteremia was significantly lower among COVID-19 patients (3.8%) than among COVID-19-negative patients (8.0%) and those not tested (7.1%) (P < 0.001). COVID-19 patients had a high proportion of organisms reflective of commensal skin microbiota, which, when excluded, reduced the bacteremia rate to 1.6%. More than 98% of all positive cultures were detected within 4 days of incubation. Bloodstream infections are very rare for COVID-19 patients, which supports the judicious use of blood cultures in the absence of compelling evidence for bacterial coinfection. Clear communication with ordering providers is necessary to prevent overutilization of blood cultures during patient surges, and laboratories should consider shortening the incubation period from 5 days to 4 days, if necessary, to free additional capacity.


Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia/diagnóstico , Bacteriemia/epidemiología , Cultivo de Sangre/estadística & datos numéricos , Coinfección/diagnóstico , Coinfección/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/complicaciones , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/complicaciones , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Betacoronavirus/aislamiento & purificación , COVID-19 , Hospitales , Humanos , Ciudad de Nueva York/epidemiología , Pandemias , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Transplantation ; 104(7): 1396-1402, 2020 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31651793

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score-based liver transplant allocation was implemented as a fair and objective measure to prioritize patients based upon disease severity. Accuracy and reproducibility of MELD is an essential assumption to ensure fairness in organ access. We hypothesized that variability in laboratory methodology between centers could impact allocation scores for individuals on the transplant waiting list. METHODS: Aliquots of 30 patient serum samples were analyzed for creatinine, bilirubin, and sodium in all transplant centers within United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) region 9. Descriptive statistics, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and linear mixed-effects regression were used to determine the relationship between center, bilirubin, and calculated MELD-sodium (MELD-Na) score. RESULTS: The mean MELD-Na score per sample ranged from 14 to 38. The mean range in MELD-Na per sample was 3 points, but 30% of samples had a range of 4-6 points. Correlation plots and intraclass correlation coefficient analysis confirmed bilirubin interfered with creatinine, with worsening agreement in creatinine at high bilirubin levels. Center and bilirubin were independently associated with creatinine reported in mixed-effects models. Unbiased hierarchical clustering suggested that samples from specific centers have consistently higher creatinine and MELD-Na values. CONCLUSIONS: Despite implementation of creatinine standardization, centers within a single UNOS region report clinically significant differences in MELD-Na on an identical sample, with differences of up to 6 points in high MELD-Na patients. The bias in MELD-Na scores based upon center choice within a region should be addressed in the current efforts to eliminate disparities in liver transplant access.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/diagnóstico , Trasplante de Hígado/normas , Asignación de Recursos/normas , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Centros de Atención Terciaria/normas , Aloinjertos/provisión & distribución , Bilirrubina/sangre , Servicios de Laboratorio Clínico/normas , Creatinina/sangre , Determinación de la Elegibilidad/normas , Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/sangre , Humanos , Selección de Paciente , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estándares de Referencia , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sodio/sangre , Estados Unidos , Listas de Espera
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA