Effectiveness and safety of measures to prevent infections and other complications associated with peripheral intravenous catheters: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) contribute substantially to the global burden of infections. This systematic review assessed 24 infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions to prevent PIVC-associated infections and other complications. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, WHO Global Index Medicus, CINAHL and reference lists for controlled studies, from January 1, 1980-March 16, 2023. We dually selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and rated the certainty of evidence (COE). For outcomes with three or more trials, we conducted Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: 105 studies met our prespecified eligibility criteria, addressing 16 of the 24 research questions; no studies were identified for eight research questions.Based on findings of low to high COE, wearing gloves reduced the risk for overall adverse events related to insertion compared to no gloves (one non-randomised controlled trial [RCT]; adjusted risk ratio [RR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.85), and catheter removal based on defined schedules potentially resulted in a lower phlebitis/thrombophlebitis incidence (10 RCTs; RR: 0.74, 95% credible interval 0.49-1.01) compared to clinically indicated removal in adults. In neonates, chlorhexidine reduced the phlebitis score compared to non-chlorhexidine-containing disinfection (one RCT; 0.14 versus 0.68, p = 0.003). No statistically significant differences were found for other measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their frequent use and concern about PIVC-associated complications, this review underscores the urgent need for more high-quality studies on effective IPC methods regarding safe PIVC management. In the absence of valid evidence, adherence to standard precaution measures and documentation remain the most important principles to curb PIVC complications.

The Impact of Antibiotic Use on Mortality in Patients Hospitalized in a COVID-19 Centre from Romania: A Retrospective Study.

Background and Objectives: Considering the significant number of patients worldwide that received empirical antibiotic therapy for COVID-19 infection due to their critical condition and the lack of therapeutical guidelines, we wanted to find out the consequences of antibiotic use in our study population. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study including symptomatic patients older than 18 years, hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 between March and December 2020 in the Internal Medicine and Pneumology Departments of Colentina Clinical Hospital. The elected outcome was death, while independent variables were antibiotic therapy and literature-cited parameters associated with mortality in this disease. Results: Out of 198 included patients, 96 (48.48%) patients received antibiotic therapy during hospitalization. Female gender (OR = 2.61, p = 0.04), history of neoplasm (OR = 7.147, p = 0.01), heart failure (OR = 8.62, p = 0.002), and diabetes mellitus (OR = 3.05, p = 0.02) were significantly associated with death in multivariate analysis. Antibiotic treatment showed a higher probability of death both in bivariate (OR = 5.333, p < 0.001) and multivariate analysis adjusted for the aforementioned prognostic factors (OR = 3.55, p = 0.01). Conclusions: After adjusting for confounders, in-hospital antibiotic administration did not improve survival in COVID-19 patients.

Antibiotic Prescription and In-Hospital Mortality in COVID-19: A Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, empiric antibiotics (ATBs) have been prescribed on a large scale in both in- and outpatients. We aimed to assess the impact of antibiotic treatment on the outcomes of hospitalised patients with moderate and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicentre cohort study in six clinical hospitals, between January 2021 and May 2021. RESULTS: We included 553 hospitalised COVID-19 patients, of whom 58% (311/553) were prescribed antibiotics, while bacteriological tests were performed in 57% (178/311) of them. Death was the outcome in 48 patients-39 from the ATBs group and 9 from the non-ATBs group. The patients who received antibiotics during hospitalisation had a higher mortality (RR = 3.37, CI 95%: 1.7-6.8), and this association was stronger in the subgroup of patients without reasons for antimicrobial treatment (RR = 6.1, CI 95%: 1.9-19.1), while in the subgroup with reasons for antimicrobial therapy the association was not statistically significant (OR = 2.33, CI 95%: 0.76-7.17). After adjusting for the confounders, receiving antibiotics remained associated with a higher mortality only in the subgroup of patients without criteria for antibiotic prescription (OR = 10.3, CI 95%: 2-52). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, antibiotic treatment did not decrease the risk of death in the patients with mild and severe COVID-19, but was associated with a higher risk of death in the subgroup of patients without reasons for it.

In-Hospital Antibiotic Use for COVID-19: Facts and Rationales Assessed through a Mixed-Methods Study.

It is well known that during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, antibiotics were overprescribed. However, less is known regarding the arguments that have led to this overuse. Our aim was to understand the factors associated with in-hospital antibiotic prescription for COVID-19, and the rationale behind it. We chose a convergent design for this mixed-methods study. Quantitative data was prospectively obtained from 533 adult patients admitted in six hospitals (services of internal medicine, infectious diseases and pneumology). Fifty-six percent of the patients received antibiotics. The qualitative data was obtained from interviewing 14 physicians active in the same departments in which the enrolled patients were hospitalized. Thematic analysis was used for the qualitative approach. Our study revealed that doctors based their decisions to prescribe antibiotics on a complex interplay of factors regarding the simultaneous appearance of consolidation on the chest computer tomography together with a worsening of clinical conditions suggestive of bacterial infection and/or an increase in inflammatory markers. Besides these features which might suggest bacterial co-/suprainfection, doctors also prescribed antibiotics in situations of uncertainty, in patients with severe disease, or with multiple associated comorbidities.

COVID-19: a trigger for severe thrombotic microangiopathy in a patient with complement gene variant.

The evidence regarding thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) related to Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with complement gene mutations as a cause of acute kidney injury (AKI) are limited. We presented the case of a 23-year-old male patient admitted with an asymptomatic form of COVID-19, but with uncontrolled hypertension and AKI. Kidney biopsy showed severe lesions of TMA. In evolution patient had persistent microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, decreased level of haptoglobin and increased LDH level. Decreased complement C3 level and the presence of schistocytes were found for the first time after biopsy. Kidney function progressively decreased and the patient remained hemodialysis dependent. Complement work-up showed a heterozygous variant with unknown significance in complement factor I (CFI) c.-13G>A, affecting the 5' UTR region of the gene. In addition, the patient was found to be heterozygous for the complement factor H (CFH) H3 haplotype (involving the rare alleles of c.-331C>T, Q672Q and E936D polymorphisms) reported as a risk factor of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. This case of AKI associated with severe TMA and secondary hemolytic uremic syndrome highlights the importance of genetic risk modifiers in the alternative pathway dysregulation of the complement in the setting of COVID-19, even in asymptomatic forms.

COVID-19 Vaccine Does Not Increase the Risk of Disease Flare-Ups among Patients with Autoimmune and Immune-Mediated Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Reports describing post-vaccine autoimmune phenomena, in previously healthy individuals, increased the concerns regarding the risk of disease flare-ups in patients with immune diseases. We aimed to assess the potential risk of disease flare-up, after receiving the COVID-19 (Coronavirus disease 2019) vaccine, during a follow-up period of 6 months. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study, enrolling the patients with autoimmune- and immune-mediated diseases who voluntarily completed our questionnaire, both online and during hospital evaluations. Based on their decision to receive the vaccine, the patients were divided into two groups (vaccinated and non-vaccinated). Participants who chose not to receive the vaccine served as a control group in terms of flare-ups. RESULTS: A total of 623 patients, 416 vaccinated and 207 non-vaccinated, were included in the study during hospital evaluations (222/623) and after online (401/623) enrolment. There was no difference concerning the risk of flare-up between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients (1.16, versus 1.72 flare-ups/100 patients-months, p = 0.245). The flare-ups were associated with having more than one immune disease, and with a previous flare-up during the past year. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find an increased risk of flare-up following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune-/immune-mediated diseases, after a median follow-up of 5.9 months. According to our results, there should not be an obvious reason for vaccine hesitancy among this category of patients.

COVID-19 Impact and Vaccination Willingness among Romanian Patients with Autoimmune/Immune-Mediated Diseases.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with immune diseases are a vulnerable population. We aimed to evaluate their access to medical care, as well as their awareness and willingness to obtain the vaccine after a year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multicenter study was conducted on a questionnaire basis, handled both online as well as in person. RESULTS: 651 patients with autoimmune or immune mediated diseases were enrolled. More than half (339/641 [53%]) reported difficulties in obtaining medical care throughout the pandemic and 135/651 ([21%]) of them were confirmed with COVID-19; 442/651, ([68%]) expressed their willingness to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The factors associated with an increased probability of vaccination were the male gender (OR = 2.01, CI95% 1.2-3.7, p = 0.001), the patient's opinion that she/he was well informed (OR = 3.2, CI 95% 2.1-6.01, p < 0.001), physician's advice (OR = 2.1, CI 95% 1.3-3.5, p < 0.001), and flu vaccination in the past (OR = 1.5, CI 95% 1.1-2.3, p < 0.001), while those associated with a decreased probability of vaccination were COVID-19 disease in the past medical history (OR = 0.7, CI 95% 0.3-0.95, p = 0.02), and the opinion that patients with autoimmune diseases are at increased risk for adverse reactions (OR = 0.7, CI95% 0.53-0.89, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Given the fact that considering themselves informed regarding vaccination is the most important factor in order to be immunized against SARS-CoV-2, effective information campaigns would substantially increase willingness.

Long-Term Longitudinal Evaluation of Six Commercial Immunoassays for the Detection of IgM and IgG Antibodies against SARS CoV-2.

The number of serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 has skyrocketed in the past year. Concerns have been raised regarding their performance characteristics, depending on the disease severity and the time of the analysis post-symptom onset (PSO). Thus, independent validations using an unbiased sample selection are required for meaningful serology data interpretation. We aimed to assess the clinical performance of six commercially available assays, the seroconversion, and the dynamics of the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The study included 528 serum samples from 156 patients with follow-up visits up to six months PSO and 161 serum samples from healthy people. The IgG/total antibodies positive percentage increased and remained above 95% after six months when chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) IgG antiS1/S2 and electro-chemiluminescent assay (ECLIA) total antiNP were used. At early time points PSO, chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) IgM antiS achieved the best sensitivity. IgM and IgG appear simultaneously in most circumstances, and when performed in parallel the sensitivity increases. The severe and the moderate clinical forms were significantly associated with higher seropositivity percentage and antibody levels. High specificity was found in all evaluated assays, but the sensitivity was variable depending on the time PSO, severity of disease, detection method and targeted antigen.

EUS-through-the-needle microbiopsy forceps in pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review.

Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are being increasingly encountered in clinical practice, and sometimes, they can represent a diagnostic challenge. Recently, a through-the-needle micro forceps biopsy (MFB) device was introduced in the endosonography practice to facilitate EUS-guided sampling of PCLs. The aim was to perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the technical aspects, safety, and efficacy of the EUS-guided MFB for PCLs. A literature search was performed in three major databases, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science in September 2019 using the search terms: "through-the-needle," "biopsy forceps," "microforceps," "endoscopic ultrasound," and "endosonography." Case reports and case series with <10 patients were excluded from the analysis. Altogether nine studies reporting on 463 patients were included in our systematic review. The mean age of the patients was 68.3 years, with a slight female predominance (60.9%). Most of the cysts were located in the body/tail of the pancreas (61.2%), with an overall mean size of 33 mm. The technical success of EUS-guided MFB was reported in 98.5%. The tissue acquisition yield reported was 88.2%, and the diagnostic accuracy was 68.6%. Adverse events were reported in 9.7%. EUS-guided MFB is technically feasible, safe, and has a high diagnostic accuracy for PCLs.

Hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of COVID-19 physicians survey: Despite lack of evidence, many would take or give to dear ones, and despite the perceived necessity of an RCT, few would participate.

INTRODUCTION: There was no evidence concerning the prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine, and only low-grade evidence regarding the use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 patients. We performed a survey among Romanian physicians in order to see how many of them would administer prophylactically hydroxychloroquine to themselves or to people close to them, and if they would participate to a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Between March 30 and April 02, 2020, a 16-item questionnaire was shared in a Romanian Facebook group of 2645 physicians dedicated to COVID-19 information, asking to be completed by physicians who could be directly involved in the care of these patients. RESULTS: A total of 785 answers were collected. Nine physicians (1.1%) thought that there was clear evidence on prescribing hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, 375 (48%) considered the evidence acceptable, 348 (44.3%) considered it weak, whereas 53 (6.8%) answered there was no evidence. 59 (7.5%) respondents were determined to take it (of which 31 = 4% already took), 192 (24.5%) were inclined to take, 271 (34.5%) were not decided yet. 175 (22.3%) of respondents declared they (would) give the treatment to their close ones, and this decision was associated with a higher age (P = 0.003), and the opinion that there was evidence (P < 0.001). When asked about the source of the treatment regimen, 286 (36.4%) indicated a scientific paper, while no scientific paper about the prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine existed at that time. 718 (91.5%) considered a randomized clinical trial necessary (RCT), but only 333 (42.4%) answered they would enrol in such a trial. There was only a very weak correlation (Kendall's tau _b = 0.255, P < 0.001) between the belief that an RCT is necessary and the willingness to enrol in such an RCT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of evidence, many physicians considered the evidence as existing, and were ready to take or to give hydroxychloroquine prophylactically to family. They considered an RCT necessary, but they were not willing to participate.

Anticoagulant protein S in COVID-19: low activity, and associated with outcome.

Introduction. COVID-19 disease was associated with both thrombo-embolic events and in-situ thrombi formation in small vessels. Antiphospholipidic antibodies were found in some studies.Aim. Assessment of protein S activity in patients with COVID-19 as a cause of this prothrombotic state, and of the association of protein S activity with worse outcome.Methods. All patients admitted for COVID-19 disease in a university hospital between 15th of May and 15th of July 2020 were prospectively enrolled into this cohort study. Patients treated with antivitamin K anticoagulants and with liver disease were excluded. All patients had protein S activity determined at admission. The main outcome was survival, while secondary outcomes were clinical severity and lung damage.Results. 91 patients were included, of which 21 (23.3%) died. Protein S activity was decreased in 65% of the patients. Death was associated with lower activity of protein S (median 42% vs. 58%, p < 0.001), and the association remained after adjustment for age, inflammation markers and ALAT. There was a dose-response relationship between protein S activity and clinical severity (Kendall_tau coefficient = -0.320, p < 0.001; Jonckheere-Terpstra for trend: p < 0.001) or pulmonary damage on CT scan (Kendall_tau coefficient = -0.290, p < 0.001; Jonckheere-Terpstra for trend: p < 0.001). High neutrophil count was also independently associated with death (p = 0.002).Conclusion. Protein S activity was lower in COVID-19 patients, and its level was associated with survival and disease severity, suggesting that it may have a role in the thrombotic manifestations of the disease.

Characteristics of shared decision making in Romania from the patient perspective: A cross-sectional multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is very important from patients' perspective. This process has not yet been evaluated in Romania. The study aims to evaluate SDM from the patients' perspective and to evaluate patients' characteristics that associate with SDM. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional multicentric study comprising eight recruitment centres was performed. Inpatients and outpatients who referred to Hospital Units treating autoimmune diseases or atrial fibrillation were included. Another sample consisted of members of the Autoimmune Disease Patient Society, who completed an online anonymous questionnaire. All participants completed the Romanian translated version of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9), as these samples were used for the validation of this questionnaire, too. Patients had to refer to the visit in which the decision concerning the antithrombotic treatment was taken (atrial fibrillation patients), or the immunosuppressive treatment was last time changed (autoimmune disease patients). Ordinal regression having the total SDM score as dependent variable was used. RESULTS: A total of 665 questionnaires were filled in within the hospital setting (n = 324; 48.7%) and online (n = 341; 51.3%). The median score for SDM was 34 of 45, but it differed between hospital completion -39/45 and online completion (anonymous) -20/45 (P < .001). Patients with higher education were influenced most by the setting, giving the best marks in hospital and low marks online, while those with lower education gave lower marks in both settings. In ordinal regression with SDM score as dependent variable, hospital completion of the questionnaire (OR = 9.5, 95% confidence interval, 5.69-16), collagen disease diagnosis (OR = 2.4, 95% confidence interval, 1.39-4.14), and immunosuppressive treatment (OR = 2.16, 95% confidence interval, 1.43-3.26) were independent predictors. CONCLUSION: In our study, full anonymity was associated with significantly lower scores for the SDM process. The patients with higher education were most influenced by this condition, while those with the lowest education were the most critical.

Eosinophilic pancreatitis versus pancreatitis associated with eosinophilic gastroenteritis - a systematic review regarding clinical features and diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Over the past years, eosinophil infiltration involving the gastrointestinal tract and pancreas leading to eosinophilic pancreatitis, eosinophilic gastroenteritis and hypereosinophilic syndrome has been reported in the literature. We aimed to analyze and compare the features involving patients with eosinophilic pancreatitis and pancreatitis associated with eosinophilic gastroenteritis and to determine if there is a connection between the two disorders or if they in fact meet the diagnostic criteria for hypereosinophilic syndrome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The following search was performed in March 2019 on PubMed (MEDLINE) database using the medical terms "pancreatitis", "eosinophilic pancreatitis", "eosinophilic gastroenteritis" and "hypereosinophilic syndrome". RESULTS: The search revealed 119 publications from 1970 onwards. A total of 83 papers were excluded, and the remaining 36 publications, consisting in case reports and case series, were analyzed. From 45 patients, 20 subjects with eosinophilic gastroenteritis developed pancreatitis, 20/45 had eosinophilic pancreatitis, and 5/45 hypereosinophilic syndrome involving the pancreas. There was no significant difference regarding clinical, laboratory and imaging features between the three groups, despite the multiple theories that explain the association of pancreatic and gastrointestinal eosinophilic infiltration. Although there was a strong resemblance between the three groups, histological evidence of eosinophilic gastrointestinal infiltration guided the treatment towards a less invasive way, while subjects with eosinophilic pancreatitis underwent pancreatic surgery to exclude potentially malignant lesions. CONCLUSION: Although there are various theories that explain pancreatitis development in patients with eosinophilic gastroenteritis, hypereosinophilia diagnostic work-up should be taken into account in all patients with high number of blood eosinophils, even in those with eosinophilic pancreatitis in order to establish the diagnosis using a minimally invasive approach and to apply an adequate treatment.

Causes of eosinophilic ascites - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In the last years an uprising interest for a relatively unknown entity, eosinophilic ascites (EA), has been recorded. Our aim is to investigate the potential causes of EA development, as well as clinical, laboratory, endoscopic and radiologic features, management and outcome in these patients. METHODS: The following research was performed on PubMed (MEDLINE) database using the medical subject headings [Mesh] terms "Ascites" AND "Eosinophils". RESULTS: A total of 284 results, dating from 1962 onwards, were found and abstracts were examined. 131 papers were excluded and the remaining 153 publications, consisting in case reports and series of cases, were analyzed. From 171 patients with EA, 127 subjects (74%) had EGE, 17 (10%) parasitic and fungal infections, 11(7%) Hypereosinophilic syndrome and 16 patients (9%) less common diseases (eosinophilic pancreatitis, chronic eosinophilic leukemia, myelofibrosis, T-cell lymphoma, Churg Strauss Syndrome, Systemic lupus erythematosus, Familial paroxysmal polyserositis and Ménétrier's disease). High eosinophil blood count and IgE levels as well as gastrointestinal symptoms are frequent. The diagnosis is based on ascitic fluid analysis, imaging and endoscopic biopsies. Therapy with corticosteroids results in resolution of eosinophilic ascites in almost all patients. CONCLUSION: In most cases, in the absence of allergy, parasitic infections, malignancy, hematological disorders, peritoneal tuberculosis, inflammatory bowel disease or autoimmune disease, EA develops as a manifestation of eosinophilic gastroenteritis.

Non-alcoholic fatty pancreas disease - practices for clinicians.

Obesity is a growing health burden worldwide, increasing the risk for several diseases featuring the metabolic syndrome - type 2 diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and cardiovascular diseases. With the increasing epidemic of obesity, a new pathologic condition has emerged as a component of the metabolic syndrome - that of non-alcoholic fatty pancreas disease (NAFPD). Similar to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), NAFPD comprises a wide spectrum of disease - from deposition of fat in the pancreas - fatty pancreas, to pancreatic inflammation and possibly pancreatic fibrosis. In contrast with NAFLD, diagnostic evaluation of NAFPD is less standardized, consisting mostly in imaging methods. Also the natural evolution of NAFPD and its association with pancreatic cancer is much less studied. Not least, the clinical consequences of NAFPD remain largely presumptions and knowledge about its metabolic impact is limited. This review will cover epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic evaluation tools and treatment options for NAFPD, with focus on practices for clinicians.

Romanian version of SDM-Q-9 validation in Internal Medicine and Cardiology setting: a multicentric cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is becoming more and more important for the patient-physician interaction. There has not been a study in Romania evaluating patients' point of view in the SDM process yet. Therefore, the present study aims to evaluate the psychometric parameters of the translated Romanian version of SDM-Q-9. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicentric cross-sectional study was performed comprising eight recruitment centers. The sample consisted of in- and outpatients who referred to Hospital Units for treatment for atrial fibrillation or collagen diseases. Furthermore, patients who were members of Autoimmune Disease Patient Society were able to participate via an online survey. All participants completed the Romanian translated SDM-Q-9. RESULTS: Altogether, 665 questionnaires were filled in within the hospital setting (n = 324; 48.7%) and online (n = 341; 51.3%). The Romanian version had good internal consistency (Cronbach α coefficient of 0.96.) Corrected item correlations were good ranging from 0.64 to 0.89 with low corrected item correlations for item 1 and item 7. PCA found a one-factorial solution (similar with previous reports) but the first item had the lowest loading. CONCLUSION: SDM-Q-9 is a useful tool for evaluation and improvement in health care that was validated in Romania and can be used in clinical setting in this country.