Severe disseminated tuberculosis in HIV-negative refugees.

In high-income countries, the presentation of tuberculosis is changing, primarily because of migration, and understanding the specific health needs of susceptible populations is becoming increasingly important. Although disseminated tuberculosis is well documented in HIV-positive patients, the disease is poorly described and less expected in HIV-negative individuals. In this Grand Round, we report eight HIV-negative refugees, who presented with extensively disseminated tuberculosis. We discuss the multifactorial causes, such as deprivations during long journeys, precarious living conditions, and the experience of violence, which might add to nutritional factors and chronic disorders, eventually resulting in a state of predisposition to immune deficiency. We also show that disseminated tuberculosis is often difficult to diagnose when pulmonary symptoms are absent. Communication difficulties between refugees and health-care workers are another major hurdle, and every effort should be made to get a valid patient history. This medical history is crucial to guide imaging and other diagnostic procedures to establish a definite diagnosis, which should be confirmed by a positive tuberculosis culture. Because many of these patients are at risk for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, drug susceptibility testing is imperative to guide therapy. In the absence of treatment guidelines for this entity, clinicians can determine treatment duration according to recommendations provided for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and affected organs. Paradoxical expansion of tuberculous lesions during therapy should be treated with corticosteroids. In many cases, treatment duration must be individualised and might even exceed 12 months.

Daptomycin versus standard therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis caused by Staphylococcus aureus.

BACKGROUND: Alternative therapies for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis are needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned 124 patients with S. aureus bacteremia with or without endocarditis to receive 6 mg of daptomycin intravenously per kilogram of body weight daily and 122 to receive initial low-dose gentamicin plus either an antistaphylococcal penicillin or vancomycin. The primary efficacy end point was treatment success 42 days after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Forty-two days after the end of therapy in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, a successful outcome was documented for 53 of 120 patients who received daptomycin as compared with 48 of 115 patients who received standard therapy (44.2 percent vs. 41.7 percent; absolute difference, 2.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -10.2 to 15.1 percent). Our results met prespecified criteria for the noninferiority of daptomycin. The success rates were similar in subgroups of patients with complicated bacteremia, right-sided endocarditis, and methicillin-resistant S. aureus. Daptomycin therapy was associated with a higher rate of microbiologic failure than was standard therapy (19 vs. 11 patients, P=0.17). In 6 of the 19 patients with microbiologic failure in the daptomycin group, isolates with reduced susceptibility to daptomycin emerged; similarly, a reduced susceptibility to vancomycin was noted in isolates from patients treated with vancomycin. As compared with daptomycin therapy, standard therapy was associated with a nonsignificantly higher rate of adverse events that led to treatment failure due to the discontinuation of therapy (17 vs. 8, P=0.06). Clinically significant renal dysfunction occurred in 11.0 percent of patients who received daptomycin and in 26.3 percent of patients who received standard therapy (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Daptomycin (6 mg per kilogram daily) is not inferior to standard therapy for S. aureus bacteremia and right-sided endocarditis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00093067 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).