A retrospective validation of different scores of guideline adherence and infectious diseases consultation on candidaemia: The higher, the better.

BACKGROUND: Recently, several scores to quantify compliance with the guidelines in candidaemia management (EQUAL, GEMICOMED, Valerio) have been developed. Evidence supporting the association of these scores to the prognosis is scarce. We aim to evaluate the performance of these candidaemia guideline adherence scores to predict candidaemia outcome. METHODS: We recorded retrospectively data from candidaemia episodes (January 2017-December 2018). We analysed adherence to guidelines for candidaemia management according to EQUAL, GEMICOMED and Valerio scores, and we correlated those to outcome. RESULTS: Fifty-four first episodes of candidaemia were retrieved. Five patients who died in the first 48 hours after blood cultures were not included. Thirty-day mortality in evaluable patients was 18.4%. Median adherence to guidelines according to EQUAL score was 17 (interquartile range [IQR]: 15-19), and according to GEMICOMED was 86% (IQR: 72.5%-100%). According to Valerio score, adequacy of antifungal prescription was 8.5/10 (SD: 1.9). A cut-off of ≥17 for EQUAL or compliance >70% for GEMICOMED was associated with inferior 30-day mortality (7.1% vs 33.3%, P = .028 and 7.9% vs 54.5%, P = .002, respectively). Infectious diseases (ID) evaluated cases obtained a better EQUAL score (>17; 82.1% vs 42.9%, P = .006), had inferior 30-day mortality (9.4% vs 35.3%, P = .049) and a better antifungal prescription adequacy (Valerio score 9.0 vs 7.5, P = .011). CONCLUSION: Adherence to guidelines for candidaemia management evaluated by means of EQUAL and GEMICOMED score was associated with a decreased 30-day mortality. Adequacy of antifungal prescription can be ameliorated. ID consultation improved guideline adherence and was associated with decreased 30-day mortality.

Impact of lung ultrasound during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Distinction between viral and bacterial pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: Lung Ultrasound is an accessible, low-cost technique that has demonstrated its usefulness in the prognostic stratification of COVID-19 patients. In addition, according to previous studies, it can guide us towards the potential aetiology, especially in epidemic situations such as the current one. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 40 patients were prospectively recruited, 30 with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and 10 with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The patients included underwent both a chest X-ray and ultrasound. RESULTS: There were no differences in the 2 groups in terms of clinical and laboratory characteristics. The main ultrasound findings in the SARS-CoV-2 group were the presence of confluent B lines and subpleural consolidations and hepatinization in the CAP group. Pleural effusion was more frequent in the CAP group. There were no normal lung ultrasound exams. Analysis of the area under the curve (AUC) curves showed an area under the curve for Lung Ultrasound of 89.2% (95% CI: 75%.0-100%, p < .001) in the identification of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The cut-off value for the lung score of 10 had a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 80.0% (p < .001). DISCUSSION: The combination of the findings of the Lung Ultrasound, with a Lung Score greater than 10, added to the rest of the additional tests, can be an excellent tool to predict the aetiology of the pneumonia.

[Impact of Lung Ultrasound dUring the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Distinction Between Viral and Bacterial Pneumonia]. / Impacto de la ecografía pulmonar Durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2: distinción entre la neumonía viral y la bacteriana.

Introduction: Lung ultrasound is an accessible, low-cost technique that has demonstrated its usefulness in the prognostic stratification of COVID-19 patients. In addition, according to previous studies, it can guide us towards the potential aetiology, especially in epidemic situations such as the current one. Patients and methods: 40 patients were prospectively recruited, 30 with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and 10 with community-acquired pneumonia. The patients included underwent both a chest X-ray and ultrasound. Results: There were no differences in the 2 groups in terms of clinical and laboratory characteristics. The main ultrasound findings in the SARS-CoV-2 group were the presence of confluent B lines and subpleural consolidations and hepatinization in the community-acquired pneumonia group. Pleural effusion was more frequent in the community-acquired pneumonia group. There were no normal lung ultrasound exams. Analysis of the area under the curve curves showed an area under the curve for lung ultrasound of 89.2% (95% CI: 75.0-100%, p < .001) in the identification of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The cut-off value for the lung score of 10 had a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 80.0% (p < .001). Discussion: The combination of the findings of the lung ultrasound, with a lung score greater than 10, added to the rest of the additional tests, can be an excellent tool to predict the aetiology of the pneumonia.