Secondary infections modify the overall course of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a retrospective study from a network of hospitals across North India.

Objective: To gain better insight into the extent of secondary bacterial and fungal infections in hospitalized patients in India, and to assess how these alter the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) so that control measures can be suggested. Methods: In this retrospective, multicentre study, the data of all patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), admitted to hospital between March 2020 and July 2021, were accessed from the electronic health records of a network of 10 hospitals across five states in North India. Results: Of 19,852 patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR and admitted to the study hospitals during the study period, 1940 (9.8%) patients developed secondary infections (SIs). Patients with SIs were, on average, 8 years older than patients without SIs (median age 62.6 vs 54.3 years; P<0.001). The risk of SIs was significantly (P<0.001) associated with age, severity of disease at admission, diabetes, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and ventilator use. The most common site of infection was urine (41.7%), followed by blood (30.8%) and sputum/bronchoalveolar lavage/endotracheal fluid (24.8%); the least common was pus/wound discharge (2.6%). Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) were the most common organisms (63.2%), followed by Gram-positive cocci (GPC) (19.6%) and fungi (17.3%). Most patients with SIs were on multiple antimicrobials. The most commonly used antibiotics against GNB were beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors (76.9%), carbapenems (57.7%), cephalosporins (53.9%), and antibiotics against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (47.1%). Empirical use of antibiotics against GPC was seen in 58.9% of patients with SIs, and empirical use of antifungals was observed in 56.9% of patients with SIs. The average length of hospital stay for patients with SIs was almost twice as long as that of patients without SIs (median 13 vs 7 days). Overall mortality among patients with SIs (40.3%) was more than eight times higher than that among patients without SIs (4.6%). Only 1.2% of patients with SIs with mild COVID-19 at admission died, compared with 17.5% of those with moderate COVID-19 at admission and 58.5% of those with severe COVID-19 at admission (P<0.001). The mortality rate was highest in patients with bloodstream infections (49.8%), followed by those with hospital-acquired pneumonia (47.9%), urinary tract infections (29.4%), and skin and soft tissue infections (29.4%). The mortality rate in patients with diabetes with SIs was 45.2%, compared with 34.3% in those without diabetes (P<0.001). Conclusions: SIs complicate the course of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. These patients tend to have a much longer hospital stay, a higher requirement for oxygen and ICU care, and a significantly higher mortality rate compared with those without SIs. The groups most vulnerable to SIs are patients with more severe COVID-19, elderly patients and patients with diabetes. Judicious empirical use of combination antimicrobials in these groups of vulnerable patients can save lives. It is desirable to have region- or country-specific guidelines for appropriate use of antibiotics and antifungals to prevent their overuse.

Bronchoscopic lung cryobiopsy: An Indian association for bronchology position statement.

BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopic lung cryobiopsy (BLC) is a novel technique for obtaining lung tissue for the diagnosis of diffuse parenchymal lung diseases. The procedure is performed using several different variations of technique, resulting in an inconsistent diagnostic yield and a variable risk of complications. There is an unmet need for standardization of the technical aspects of BLC. METHODOLOGY: This is a position statement framed by a group comprising experts from the fields of pulmonary medicine, thoracic surgery, pathology, and radiology under the aegis of the Indian Association for Bronchology. Sixteen questions on various technical aspects of BLC were framed. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and EMBASE databases. The expert group discussed the available evidence relevant to each question through e-mail and a face-to-face meeting, and arrived at a consensus. RESULTS: The experts agreed that patients should be carefully selected for BLC after weighing the risks and benefits of the procedure. Where appropriate, consideration should be given to perform alternate procedures such as conventional transbronchial biopsy or subject the patient directly to a surgical lung biopsy. The procedure is best performed after placement of an artificial airway under sedation/general anesthesia. Fluoroscopic guidance and occlusion balloon should be utilized for positioning the cryoprobe to reduce the risk of pneumothorax and bleeding, respectively. At least four tissue specimens (with at least two of adequate size, i.e., ≥5 mm) should be obtained during the procedure from different lobes or different segments of a lobe. The histopathological findings of BLC should be interpreted by an experienced pulmonary pathologist. The final diagnosis should be made after a multidisciplinary discussion. Finally, there is a need for structured training for performing BLC. CONCLUSION: This position statement is an attempt to provide practical recommendations for the performance of BLC in DPLDs.

Interstitial lung disease with usual interstitial pneumonia pattern preceding the presentation of ANCA-associated vasculitis by 4†years: coincidence or correlation?

Initial evaluation for ANCA should be performed at diagnosis in all patients with pulmonary fibrosis; ANCA positivity will increase risk of development of vasculitis and promote further evaluation and specific monitoring http://ow.ly/hf4730kVZF8.