Performance of the Cepheid Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/S. aureus Skin and Soft Tissue Infection PCR Assay on Respiratory Samples from Mechanically Ventilated Patients for S. aureus Screening during the Phase 2 Double-Blind SAATELLITE Study.

We investigated the performance of the Xpert methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)/S. aureus skin and soft tissue (SSTI) quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay in SAATELLITE, a multicenter, double-blind, phase 2 study of suvratoxumab, a monoclonal antibody (MAb) targeting S. aureus alpha-toxin, for reducing the incidence of S. aureus pneumonia. The assay was used to detect methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and MRSA in lower respiratory tract (LRT) samples from mechanically ventilated patients. LRT culture results were compared with S. aureus protein A (spa) gene cycle threshold (CT) values. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and Youden index were used to determine the CT cutoff for best separation of culture-S. aureus-negative and S. aureus-positive patients. Of 720 screened subjects, 299 (41.5%) were S. aureus positive by qPCR, of whom 209 had culture data: 162 (77.5%) were S. aureus positive and 47 (22.5%) were S. aureus negative. Culture results were negatively affected by antibiotic use and cross-laboratory variability. An inverse linear correlation was observed between CT values and quantitative S. aureus culture results. A spa CT value of 29 (≈2 × 103 CFU/mL) served as the best cutoff for separation between culture-negative and culture-positive samples. The associated area under the ROC curve was 83.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78 to 90%). Suvratoxumab provided greater reduction in S. aureus pneumonia or death than placebo in subjects with low S. aureus load (CT ≥ 29; relative risk reduction [RRR], 50.0%; 90% CI, 2.7 to 74.4%) versus the total study population (RRR, 25.2%; 90% CI, -4.3 to 46.4%). The qPCR assay was easy to perform, sensitive, and standardized and provided better sensitivity than conventional culture for S. aureus detection. Quantitative PCR CT output correlated with suvratoxumab efficacy in reducing S. aureus pneumonia incidence or death in S. aureus-colonized, mechanically ventilated patients.

Comparative efficacy of linezolid and vancomycin for endotracheal tube MRSA biofilms from ICU patients.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of systemic treatment with linezolid (LNZ) versus vancomycin (VAN) on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) burden and eradication in endotracheal tube (ETT) biofilm and ETT cuff from orotracheally intubated patients with MRSA respiratory infection. METHODS: Prospective observational clinical study was carried out at four European tertiary hospitals. Plasma and endotracheal aspirate (ETA) levels of LNZ and VAN were determined 72 h after treatment initiation through high-performance liquid chromatography or bioassay. LNZ or VAN concentration in the ETT biofilm and MRSA burden and eradication was determined upon extubation. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for LNZ and VAN was assessed by E-test strips (Biomerieux®). Scanning electron microscopy images were obtained, and ETT biofilm thickness was compared between groups. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients, 15 treated with LNZ and 10 with VAN, were included in the study. LNZ presented a significantly higher concentration (µg/mL) than VAN in ETT biofilm (72.8 [1.3-127.1] vs 0.4 [0.4-1.3], p < 0.001), although both drugs achieved therapeutic plasma levels 72 h after treatment initiation. Systemic treatment with LNZ achieved lower ETT cuff MRSA burdens than systemic treatment with VAN. Indeed, LNZ increased the MRSA eradication rate in ETT cuff compared with VAN (LNZ 75%, VAN 20%, p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: In ICU patients with MRSA respiratory infection intubated for long periods, systemic treatment with LNZ obtains a greater beneficial effect than VAN in limiting MRSA burden in ETT cuff.

[For an open-door, more comfortable and humane intensive care unit. It is time for change]. / Por una UCI de puertas abiertas, más confortable y humana. Es tiempo de cambio.

The Intensive Care Unit is a wonderful place where lives are saved, but it is also a very harsh and unpleasant place where critically ill patients face terrible diseases in very adverse environmental conditions. We must change the design of the ICU and its organization; we must improve privacy, welfare and comfort of patients and families, following their personal and emotional demands. To free up the visiting hours and to improve family care are among our most urging matters, which we should delay no further. We must equip the ICUs with modern monitors and respirators but we must also invest in organization, design, environmental comfort and humanization. We need to redesign clinical practise so that ICU care becomes more agreeable and humane. We should put off this change no longer, since it is an imperative social and professional demand.

Negative predictive value of procalcitonin to rule out bacterial respiratory co-infection in critical covid-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Procalcitonin (PCT) and C-Reactive Protein (CRP) are useful biomarkers to differentiate bacterial from viral or fungal infections, although the association between them and co-infection or mortality in COVID-19 remains unclear. METHODS: The study represents a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia to 84 ICUs from ten countries between (March 2020-January 2021). Primary outcome was to determine whether PCT or CRP at admission could predict community-acquired bacterial respiratory co-infection (BC) and its added clinical value by determining the best discriminating cut-off values. Secondary outcome was to investigate its association with mortality. To evaluate the main outcome, a binary logistic regression was performed. The area under the curve evaluated diagnostic performance for BC prediction. RESULTS: 4635 patients were included, 7.6% fulfilled BC diagnosis. PCT (0.25[IQR 0.1-0.7] versus 0.20[IQR 0.1-0.5]ng/mL, p<0.001) and CRP (14.8[IQR 8.2-23.8] versus 13.3 [7-21.7]mg/dL, p=0.01) were higher in BC group. Neither PCT nor CRP were independently associated with BC and both had a poor ability to predict BC (AUC for PCT 0.56, for CRP 0.54). Baseline values of PCT<0.3ng/mL, could be helpful to rule out BC (negative predictive value 91.1%) and PCT≥0.50ng/mL was associated with ICU mortality (OR 1.5,p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These biomarkers at ICU admission led to a poor ability to predict BC among patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Baseline values of PCT<0.3ng/mL may be useful to rule out BC, providing clinicians a valuable tool to guide antibiotic stewardship and allowing the unjustified overuse of antibiotics observed during the pandemic, additionally PCT≥0.50ng/mL might predict worsening outcomes.

Mortality comparison between the first and second/third waves among 3,795 critical COVID-19 patients with pneumonia admitted to the ICU: A multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the changes in critical care throughout the pandemic have improved the outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in adults with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to 73 ICUs from Spain, Andorra and Ireland between February 2020 and March 2021. The first wave corresponded with the period from February 2020 to June 2020, whereas the second/third waves occurred from July 2020 to March 2021. The primary outcome was ICU mortality between study periods. Mortality predictors and differences in mortality between COVID-19 waves were identified using logistic regression. FINDINGS: As of March 2021, the participating ICUs had included 3795 COVID-19 pneumonia patients, 2479 (65·3%) and 1316 (34·7%) belonging to the first and second/third waves, respectively. Illness severity scores predicting mortality were lower in the second/third waves compared with the first wave according with the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation system (median APACHE II score 12 [IQR 9-16] vs 14 [IQR 10-19]) and the organ failure assessment score (median SOFA 4 [3-6] vs 5 [3-7], p<0·001). The need of invasive mechanical ventilation was high (76·1%) during the whole study period. However, a significant increase in the use of high flow nasal cannula (48·7% vs 18·2%, p<0·001) was found in the second/third waves compared with the first surge. Significant changes on treatments prescribed were also observed, highlighting the remarkable increase on the use of corticosteroids to up to 95.9% in the second/third waves. A significant reduction on the use of tocilizumab was found during the study (first wave 28·9% vs second/third waves 6·2%, p<0·001), and a negligible administration of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, and interferon during the second/third waves compared with the first wave. Overall ICU mortality was 30·7% (n = 1166), without significant differences between study periods (first wave 31·7% vs second/third waves 28·8%, p = 0·06). No significant differences were found in ICU mortality between waves according to age subsets except for the subgroup of 61-75 years of age, in whom a reduced unadjusted ICU mortality was observed in the second/third waves (first 38·7% vs second/third 34·0%, p = 0·048). Non-survivors were older, with higher severity of the disease, had more comorbidities, and developed more complications. After adjusting for confounding factors through a multivariable analysis, no significant association was found between the COVID-19 waves and mortality (OR 0·81, 95% CI 0·64-1·03; p = 0·09). Ventilator-associated pneumonia rate increased significantly during the second/third waves and it was independently associated with ICU mortality (OR 1·48, 95% CI 1·19-1·85, p<0·001). Nevertheless, a significant reduction both in the ICU and hospital length of stay in survivors was observed during the second/third waves. INTERPRETATION: Despite substantial changes on supportive care and management, we did not find significant improvement on case-fatality rates among critical COVID-19 pneumonia patients. FUNDING: Ricardo Barri Casanovas Foundation (RBCF2020) and SEMICYUC.