ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: From October 2020 to October 2022, we conducted an implementation study to offer telemedicine (TM) across four HIV units of general public hospitals in Buenos Aires. The intervention used TM to provide a continuum of care to patients with HIV. METHODS AND SETTING: We used the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the strategy. The study started during a COVID-19 outbreak with strict lockdown policies and continued until return to normal practices. Implementation facilitation served as the core implementation strategy. RESULTS: We reached 4118 patients (58% of eligible individuals), and the main perceived benefits were the ability to avoid exposure to infectious diseases and reduced travel time and cost. After a median of 515 days of follow-up, 95.7% of participants with HIV were receiving antiretroviral therapy, and 87.8% were virally suppressed, with a median CD4+ count of 648 cells/µL. In total, 36.6% reported clinical events, and 20.4% presented with COVID-19 infection. The proportion of physicians adopting TM was 69.37%. After enrolment, 2406 of 5640 (43%) follow-up visits were conducted via TM. By the end of the study, 26.29% of appointments offered in the four centres were through TM, whereas 73.71% were in-person appointments. CONCLUSION: It was feasible to implement TM in the four centres in the public health sector in Buenos Aires, Argentina. It was acceptable for both patients and healthcare workers, and effectively reached a large proportion of the population served in these clinics. Both healthcare workers and patients consider it a model of care that will continue to be offered in the future.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Argentina/epidemiology , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Continuity of Patient Care/organization & administrationABSTRACT
ntroducción: El diagnóstico tardío de la infección por VIH y el acceso de los pacientes con enfermedad avanzada al sistema de salud afectan negativamente los beneficios in-dividuales y colectivos del tratamiento antirretroviral. A nivel mundial existe una alta prevalencia de diagnóstico tardío es-pecialmente en poblaciones vulnerables como los migrantes.Objetivos: Medir la prevalencia de diagnóstico tardío de infección por VIH entre migrantes internacionales y com-pararla con la de los argentinos.Material y métodos: Estudio retrospectivo, observacional, de personas mayores de 16 años asistidas en el Hospital General de Agudos Donación Francisco Santojanni que hubieran recibido diagnóstico de infección por VIH entre 01/1/2018 y el 31/12/2021. Se determinó la mediana de recuento de CD4 basal y la prevalencia de diagnóstico tar-dío. Aplicamos la prueba de la suma de rangos de Wilcoxon para la variable contínua y la prueba de Fisher para com-parar proporciones.Resultados: Incluimos 199 personas (52 migrantes, 147 argentinos). Los migrantes presentaron un nivel basal de linfocitos CD4 significativamente menor [Mediana (RIC 25-75) 248 (79-466) vs. 331 (166-532); p=0,044], mayor tasa de presentación tardía [69,2% vs. 54,4%; RR 1,27 (IC95 1,01-1,61); p=0,072] y con sida [44,2% vs. 30,6%; RR 1,44 (IC95 0,98-2,13); p=0,089] y una menor proporción de diagnós-ticos en etapa temprana [13,5% vs. 29,3%; RR 0,46 (IC95 0,22-0,96); p=0,026].Conclusiones: Los migrantes internacionales accedieron al diagnóstico en peor estado clínico que los argentinos. Conocer este dato es imprescindible para elaborar políti-cas tendientes a mejorar el acceso al diagnóstico de esta población vulnerable.
Introduction: The late diagnosis of HIV infection and the access of patients to health system with advanced disease negatively affect the individual and collective benefits of antiretroviral treatment. There is a worldwide high prevalence of late diagnosis, specially in vulnerable populations, such as migrants.Objectives: to measure the prevalence of late diagnosis of HIV infection among international migrants and compare it with the people born in Argentina.Material and methods: retrospective and observational study of people over 16 years old, assisted at the Donación Francisco Santojanni General Hospital, who had received a diagnosis of HIV infection between 01-01-2018 and 12-31-2021. The median baseline CD4 cell count and the prevalence of late diagnosis were determined. We applied the Wilcoxon rank sum test for the continuous variable and the Fisher test to compare proportions.Results: 199 subjects (52 migrants, 147 Argentinians) were included. Migrants presented a significantly lower baseline CD4 cell count [Median (IQR 25-75) 248 (79-466) vs 331 (166-532); p=0.044], a higher rate of late presentation [69.2% vs 54.4%; RR 1.27 (CI95 1.01-1.61); p=0.072], presentation with aids [44.2% vs 30.6%; RR 1.44 (CI95 0.98-2.13); p=0.089]; and a lower proportion of early stage presentation [13.5% vs 29.3%; RR 0.46 (CI95 0.22-0.96); p=0.026].Conclusions: international migrants accessed to the diagnosis in a worse clinical condition than Argentinians. Knowing this information is essential for the development of policies aimed to improve the access to diagnosis of this vulnerable population
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Transients and Migrants , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Prevalence , Vulnerable Populations , Delayed DiagnosisABSTRACT
Antifungal stewardship is a critical component of healthcare management that focuses on optimizing the use of antifungal medications to improve patient outcomes, minimize resistance, and reduce healthcare costs. In resource-limited settings, the prevalence of fungal infections remains a significant health concern, often exacerbated by factors such as compromised immune systems, inadequate diagnostic capabilities, and limited access to antifungal agents. This paper reviews the current state of antifungal stewardship practices in developing countries, addressing the unique socioeconomic and healthcare landscape.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Clinical features and outcomes of SARSCoV-2 infections may change between different waves of the pandemic. The objective of this study was to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes between two cohorts of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the first and second waves in Argentina. METHODS: Multicenter and prospective registry of patients =18 years old with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to 18 hospitals in Argentina during the first wave (March to October 2020) and second wave (March to July 2021) of the pandemic. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of these patients were compared. RESULTS: A total of 1691 patients were included (first wave n = 809, second wave n = 882). Hospitalized patients during the second wave were older (median 53 years vs. 61 years, p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (71% vs. 77%, p=0.007) and required more supplemental oxygen at admission (21% vs 62%, p < 0.001). During hospitalization, patients of the second wave required more supplemental oxygen (49% vs. 85%, p < 0.001), invasive ventilation (12% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) and had higher 30- day mortality (11% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). Comparing only patients who required supplemental oxygen during hospitalization, 30-day mortality was 20% and 30% p < 0.001 for the first and second wave, respectively. CONCLUSION: Compared to patients admitted during the first wave, patients admitted with SARS-CoV2 during the second wave in Argentina were more seriously ill and had a higher mortality.
Introducción: Las características clínicas y evolutivas de los pacientes con diagnóstico de COVID-19 pueden diferir entre las distintas olas de la pandemia. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar las características clínicas, evolución y mortalidad de pacientes hospitalizados por COVID-19 durante la primera y segunda ola en Argentina. Métodos: Registro multicéntrico y prospectivo de pacientes = 18 años con diagnóstico confirmado de COVID-19 internados en 18 hospitales de Argentina durante la primera (marzo a octubre 2020) y la segunda ola (marzo a julio 2021) de la pandemia. Se compararon variables demográficas, características clínicas, y evolución a 30 días. Resultados: Se incluyeron un total de 1691 pacientes (primera ola n = 809, segunda ola n = 882). Los pacientes hospitalizados durante la segunda ola tenían mayor edad (mediana 53 años vs. 61 años, p < 0.001), comorbilidades (71% vs. 77%, p = 0.007) y requerimiento de oxígeno (21% vs. 62%, p < 0.001). Durante la hospitalización, los pacientes de la segunda ola requirieron más oxigenoterapia (49% vs. 85%, p < 0.001), asistencia mecánica respiratoria (12% vs. 22%, p < 0,001) y presentaron mayor mortalidad (11% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). Comparando únicamente a los que requirieron oxigenoterapia durante la hospitalización, la mortalidad a los 30 días fue de 20% y 30% p < 0.001 en la primera y segunda ola respectivamente. Conclusión: Comparados con los pacientes internados durante la primera ola, los internados durante la segunda ola de SARS-CoV-2 en Argentina presentaron mayor gravedad y mortalidad.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Adolescent , Pandemics , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2 , Oxygen , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Resumen Introducción : Las características clínicas y evolutivas de los pacientes con diagnóstico de COVID-19 pueden diferir entre las distintas olas de la pandemia. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar las características clínicas, evolución y mortalidad de pacientes hospitalizados por COVID-19 durante la primera y segunda ola en Argentina. Métodos : Registro multicéntrico y prospectivo de pacientes ≥ 18 años con diagnóstico confirmado de COVID-19 internados en 18 hospitales de Argentina durante la primera (marzo a octubre 2020) y la segunda ola (marzo a julio 2021) de la pandemia. Se compararon variables demográficas, características clínicas, y evolu ción a 30 días. Resultados : Se incluyeron un total de 1691 pacien tes (primera ola n = 809, segunda ola n = 882). Los pa cientes hospitalizados durante la segunda ola tenían mayor edad (mediana 53 años vs. 61 años, p < 0.001), comorbilidades (71% vs. 77%, p = 0.007) y requerimiento de oxígeno (21% vs. 62%, p < 0.001). Durante la hospi talización, los pacientes de la segunda ola requirieron más oxigenoterapia (49% vs. 85%, p < 0.001), asistencia mecánica respiratoria (12% vs. 22%, p <0,001) y presen taron mayor mortalidad (11% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). Compa rando únicamente a los que requirieron oxigenoterapia durante la hospitalización, la mortalidad a los 30 días fue de 20% y 30% p < 0.001 en la primera y segunda ola respectivamente. Conclusión : Comparados con los pacientes interna dos durante la primera ola, los internados durante la segunda ola de SARS-CoV-2 en Argentina presentaron mayor gravedad y mortalidad.
Abstract Introduction : Clinical features and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infections may change between different waves of the pandemic. The objective of this study was to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes between two cohorts of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the first and second waves in Argentina. Methods : Multicenter and prospective registry of patients ≥18 years old with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to 18 hospitals in Argentina during the first wave (March to October 2020) and second wave (March to July 2021) of the pandemic. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of these patients were compared. Results : A total of 1691 patients were included (first wave n = 809, second wave n = 882). Hospitalized pa tients during the second wave were older (median 53 years vs. 61 years, p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (71% vs. 77%, p=0.007) and required more supplemental oxygen at admission (21% vs 62%, p < 0.001). During hos pitalization, patients of the second wave required more supplemental oxygen (49% vs. 85%, p < 0.001), invasive ventilation (12% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) and had higher 30- day mortality (11% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). Comparing only patients who required supplemental oxygen during hos pitalization, 30-day mortality was 20% and 30% p < 0.001 for the first and second wave, respectively. Conclusion : Compared to patients admitted during the first wave, patients admitted with SARS-CoV2 dur ing the second wave in Argentina were more seriously ill and had a higher mortality.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Clinical features and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infections diverge in different countries. The aim of this study was to describe clinical characteristics and outcomes in a cohort of patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in Argentina. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort study of ≥18 years-old patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection consecutively admitted to 19 hospitals in Argentina. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify variables associated with 30-day mortality and admission to intensive care unit (ICU). RESULTS: A total of 809 patients were analyzed. Median age was 53 years, 56% were males and 71% had at least one comorbidity. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (32%), obesity (23%) and diabetes (17%). Disease severity at admission was classified as mild 25%, moderate 51%, severe 17%, and critical 7%. Almost half of patients (49%) required supplemental oxygen, 18% ICU, and 12% invasive ventilation. Overall, 30-day mortality was 11%. Factors independently associated with ICU admission were male gender (OR 1.81; 95%CI 1.16-2.81), hypertension (OR 3.21; 95%CI 2.08-4.95), obesity (OR 2.38; 95%CI 1.51-3.7), oxygen saturation ≤93% (OR 6.45; 95%CI 4.20-9.92) and lymphopenia (OR 3.21; 95%CI 2.08-4.95). Factors independently associated with 30-day mortality included age ≥60 years-old (OR 2.68; 95% CI 1.63-4.43), oxygen saturation ≤93% (OR 3.19; 95%CI 1.97-5.16) and lymphopenia (OR 2.65; 95%CI 1.64-4.27). CONCLUSIONS: This cohort validates crucial clinical data on patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in Argentina.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Argentina/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Sex FactorsABSTRACT
La Sociedad Argentina de Infectología y otras sociedades científicas han actualizado estas recomendaciones utilizando, además de información internacional, la de un estudio multicéntrico prospectivo sobre infecciones del tracto urinario del adulto realizado en Argentina durante 2016-2017. La bacteriuria asintomática debe ser tratada solo en embarazadas, a quienes también se las debe investigar sistemáticamente; los antibióticos de elección son nitrofurantoína, amoxicilina, amoxicilina-clavulánico, cefalexina y trimetoprima-sulfametoxazol. Ante procedimientos que impliquen lesión con sangrado del tracto urinario se recomienda solicitar urocultivo para pesquisar bacteriuria asintomática, y, si resultara positivo, administrar antimicrobianos según sensibilidad desde inmediatamente antes hasta 24 horas luego de la intervención. En mujeres, la cistitis puede ser tratada con nitrofurantoina, cefalexina, o fosfomicina y no se recomienda usar trimetoprima-sulfametoxazol o fluoroquinolonas; en pielonefritis puede emplearse ciprofloxacina, cefixima o cefalexina si el tratamiento es ambulatorio o ceftriaxona, cefazolina o amikacina si es hospitalario. En los hombres, las infecciones del tracto urinario se consideran siempre complicadas. Se recomienda tratamiento con nitrofurantoina o cefalexina por 7 días, o bien monodosis con fosfomicina. Para la pielonefritis en hombres se sugiere ciprofloxacina, ceftriaxona o cefixima si el tratamiento es ambulatorio y ceftriaxona o amikacina si es hospitalario. Se sugiere tratar las prostatitis bacterianas agudas con ceftriaxona o gentamicina. En cuanto a las prostatitis bacterianas crónicas, si bien su tratamiento de elección hasta hace poco fueron las fluoroquinolonas, la creciente resistencia y ciertas dudas sobre la seguridad de estas drogas obligan a considerar el uso de alternativas como fosfomicina.
The Argentine Society of Infectious Diseases and other scientific societies have updated these recommendations based on data on urinary tract infections in adults obtained from a prospective multicenter study conducted in Argentina during 2016-2017. Asymptomatic bacteriuria should be treated only in pregnant women, who should also be systematically investigated; the antibiotics of choice are nitrofurantoin, amoxicillin, clavulanic/amoxicillin, cephalexin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. In procedures involving injury to the urinary tract with bleeding, it is recommended to request urine culture and, in the presence of bacteriuria, antimicrobial treatment according to sensitivity should be prescribed from immediately before up to 24 hours after the intervention. In women, cystitis can be treated with nitrofurantoin, cephalexin or fosfomycin, while trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and fluoroquinolones are not recommended; pyelonephritis can be treated with ciprofloxacin, cefixime or cephalexin in ambulatory women or ceftriaxone, cefazolin or amikacin in those who are hospitalized. In men, urinary tract infections are always considered complicated; nitrofurantoin or cephalexin are recommended for 7 days, alternatively fosfomycin should be given in a single dose. In men, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone or cefixime are suggested for pyelonephritis on ambulatory treatment whereas ceftriaxone or amikacin are recommended for hospitalized patients. Acute bacterial prostatitis can be treated with ceftriaxone or gentamicin. Fluoroquinolones were the choice treatment for chronic bacterial prostatitis until recently; they are no longer recommended due to the increasing resistance and recent concerns regarding the safety of these drugs; alternative antibiotics such as fosfomycin are to be considered.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Pregnancy , Argentina , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Consensus , Anti-Infective Agents, Urinary/therapeutic use , Prostatitis/diagnosis , Prostatitis/drug therapy , Pyelonephritis/diagnosis , Pyelonephritis/drug therapy , Urinary Tract Infections/diagnosis , Prospective Studies , Cystitis/diagnosis , Cystitis/drug therapyABSTRACT
La segunda parte del Consenso Argentino Intersociedades de Infección Urinaria incluye el análisis de situaciones especiales. En pacientes con sonda vesical se debe solicitar urocultivo solo cuando hay signo-sintomatología de infección del tracto urinario, antes de instrumentaciones de la vía urinaria o como control en pacientes post-trasplante renal. El tratamiento empírico recomendado en pacientes sin factores de riesgo es cefalosporinas de tercera generación o aminoglucósidos. Las infecciones del tracto urinario asociadas a cálculos son siempre consideradas complicadas. En caso de obstrucción con urosepsis, deberá realizarse drenaje de urgencia por vía percutánea o ureteral. En pacientes con stents o prótesis ureterales, como catéteres doble J, el tratamiento empírico deberá basarse en la epidemiología, los antibióticos previos y el estado clínico. Antes del procedimiento de litotricia extracorpórea se recomienda pesquisar la bacteriuria y, si es positiva, administrar profilaxis antibiótica según el antibiograma. Cefalosporinas de primera generación o aminoglúcosidos son opciones válidas. Se recomienda aplicar profilaxis antibiótica con cefalosporinas de primera generación o aminoglúcosidos antes de la nefrolitotomía percutánea. La biopsia prostática trans-rectal puede asociarse a complicaciones infecciosas, como infecciones del tracto urinario o prostatitis aguda, principalmente por Escherichia coli u otras enterobacterias. En pacientes sin factores de riesgo para gérmenes multirresistentes y urocultivo negativo se recomienda realizar profilaxis con amikacina o ceftriaxona endovenosas. En pacientes con urocultivo positivo, se realizará profilaxis según antibiograma, 24 horas previas a 24 horas post-procedimiento. Para el tratamiento dirigido de la prostatitis post-biopsia trans-rectal, los carbapenémicos durante 3-4 semanas son el tratamiento de elección.
The second part of the Inter-Society Argentine Consensus on Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) includes the analysis of special situations. In patients with urinary catheter, urine culture should be requested only in the presence of UTI symptomatology, before instrumentation of the urinary tract, or as a post-transplant control. The antibiotics recommended for empirical treatment in patients without risk factors are third-generation cephalosporins or aminoglycosides. UTIs associated with stones are always considered complicated. In case of obstruction with urosepsis, an emergency drainage should be performed via a percutaneous nefrostomy or ureteral stenting. In patients with stents or ureteral prostheses, such as double J catheters, empirical treatment should be based on epidemiology, prior antibiotics, and clinical status. Before the extracorporeal lithotripsy procedure, bacteriuria should be investigated and antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered in case of positive result, according to the antibiogram. First generation cephalosporins or aminoglycosides are valid alternatives. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis with first-generation cephalosporins or aminoglycosides before percutaneous nephrolithotomy is recommended. Transrectal prostatic biopsy can be associated with infectious complications, such as UTI or acute prostatitis, mainly due to Escherichia coli or other enterobacteria. In patients without risk factors for multiresistant bacteria and negative urine culture, prophylaxis with intravenous amikacin or ceftriaxone is recommended. In patients with positive urine culture, prophylaxis will be performed according to the antibiogram, from 24 hours before to 24 hours post-procedure. For the targeted treatment of post-transrectal biopsy prostatitis, carbapenems for 3-4 weeks are the treatment of choice.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Urinary Tract Infections/etiology , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Consensus , Anti-Infective Agents, Urinary/therapeutic use , Argentina , Prostatitis/etiology , Prostatitis/drug therapy , Lithotripsy/adverse effects , Stents/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Nephrolithiasis/complications , Urinary Catheters/adverse effects , Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous/adverse effectsABSTRACT
The Argentine Society of Infectious Diseases and other scientific societies have updated these recommendations based on data on urinary tract infections in adults obtained from a prospective multicenter study conducted in Argentina during 2016-2017. Asymptomatic bacteriuria should be treated only in pregnant women, who should also be systematically investigated; the antibiotics of choice are nitrofurantoin, amoxicillin, clavulanic/amoxicillin, cephalexin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. In procedures involving injury to the urinary tract with bleeding, it is recommended to request urine culture and, in the presence of bacteriuria, antimicrobial treatment according to sensitivity should be prescribed from immediately before up to 24 hours after the intervention. In women, cystitis can be treated with nitrofurantoin, cephalexin or fosfomycin, while trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and fluoroquinolones are not recommended; pyelonephritis can be treated with ciprofloxacin, cefixime or cephalexin in ambulatory women or ceftriaxone, cefazolin or amikacin in those who are hospitalized. In men, urinary tract infections are always considered complicated; nitrofurantoin or cephalexin are recommended for 7 days, alternatively fosfomycin should be given in a single dose. In men, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone or cefixime are suggested for pyelonephritis on ambulatory treatment whereas ceftriaxone or amikacin are recommended for hospitalized patients. Acute bacterial prostatitis can be treated with ceftriaxone or gentamicin. Fluoroquinolones were the choice treatment for chronic bacterial prostatitis until recently; they are no longer recommended due to the increasing resistance and recent concerns regarding the safety of these drugs; alternative antibiotics such as fosfomycin are to be considered.
La Sociedad Argentina de Infectología y otras sociedades científicas han actualizado estas recomendaciones utilizando, además de información internacional, la de un estudio multicéntrico prospectivo sobre infecciones del tracto urinario del adulto realizado en Argentina durante 2016-2017. La bacteriuria asintomática debe ser tratada solo en embarazadas, a quienes también se las debe investigar sistemáticamente; los antibióticos de elección son nitrofurantoína, amoxicilina, amoxicilina-clavulánico, cefalexina y trimetoprimasulfametoxazol. Ante procedimientos que impliquen lesión con sangrado del tracto urinario se recomienda solicitar urocultivo para pesquisar bacteriuria asintomática, y, si resultara positivo, administrar antimicrobianos según sensibilidad desde inmediatamente antes hasta 24 horas luego de la intervención. En mujeres, la cistitis puede ser tratada con nitrofurantoina, cefalexina, o fosfomicina y no se recomienda usar trimetoprima-sulfametoxazol o fluoroquinolonas; en pielonefritis puede emplearse ciprofloxacina, cefixima o cefalexina si el tratamiento es ambulatorio o ceftriaxona, cefazolina o amikacina si es hospitalario. En los hombres, las infecciones del tracto urinario se consideran siempre complicadas. Se recomienda tratamiento con nitrofurantoina o cefalexina por 7 días, o bien monodosis con fosfomicina. Para la pielonefritis en hombres se sugiere ciprofloxacina, ceftriaxona o cefixima si el tratamiento es ambulatorio y ceftriaxona o amikacina si es hospitalario. Se sugiere tratar las prostatitis bacterianas agudas con ceftriaxona o gentamicina. En cuanto a las prostatitis bacterianas crónicas, si bien su tratamiento de elección hasta hace poco fueron las fluoroquinolonas, la creciente resistencia y ciertas dudas sobre la seguridad de estas drogas obligan a considerar el uso de alternativas como fosfomicina.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Urinary/therapeutic use , Consensus , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Argentina , Cystitis/diagnosis , Cystitis/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , Prostatitis/diagnosis , Prostatitis/drug therapy , Pyelonephritis/diagnosis , Pyelonephritis/drug therapy , Urinary Tract Infections/diagnosisABSTRACT
The second part of the Inter-Society Argentine Consensus on Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) includes the analysis of special situations. In patients with urinary catheter, urine culture should be requested only in the presence of UTI symptomatology, before instrumentation of the urinary tract, or as a post-transplant control. The antibiotics recommended for empirical treatment in patients without risk factors are third-generation cephalosporins or aminoglycosides. UTIs associated with stones are always considered complicated. In case of obstruction with urosepsis, an emergency drainage should be performed via a percutaneous nefrostomy or ureteral stenting. In patients with stents or ureteral prostheses, such as double J catheters, empirical treatment should be based on epidemiology, prior antibiotics, and clinical status. Before the extracorporeal lithotripsy procedure, bacteriuria should be investigated and antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered in case of positive result, according to the antibiogram. First generation cephalosporins or aminoglycosides are valid alternatives. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis with first-generation cephalosporins or aminoglycosides before percutaneous nephrolithotomy is recommended. Transrectal prostatic biopsy can be associated with infectious complications, such as UTI or acute prostatitis, mainly due to Escherichia coli or other enterobacteria. In patients without risk factors for multiresistant bacteria and negative urine culture, prophylaxis with intravenous amikacin or ceftriaxone is recommended. In patients with positive urine culture, prophylaxis will be performed according to the antibiogram, from 24 hours before to 24 hours post-procedure. For the targeted treatment of post-transrectal biopsy prostatitis, carbapenems for 3-4 weeks are the treatment of choice.
La segunda parte del Consenso Argentino Intersociedades de Infección Urinaria incluye el análisis de situaciones especiales. En pacientes con sonda vesical se debe solicitar urocultivo solo cuando hay signo-sintomatología de infección del tracto urinario, antes de instrumentaciones de la vía urinaria o como control en pacientes post-trasplante renal. El tratamiento empírico recomendado en pacientes sin factores de riesgo es cefalosporinas de tercera generación o aminoglucósidos. Las infecciones del tracto urinario asociadas a cálculos son siempre consideradas complicadas. En caso de obstrucción con urosepsis, deberá realizarse drenaje de urgencia por vía percutánea o ureteral. En pacientes con stents o prótesis ureterales, como catéteres doble J, el tratamiento empírico deberá basarse en la epidemiología, los antibióticos previos y el estado clínico. Antes del procedimiento de litotricia extracorpórea se recomienda pesquisar la bacteriuria y, si es positiva, administrar profilaxis antibiótica según el antibiograma. Cefalosporinas de primera generación o aminoglúcosidos son opciones válidas. Se recomienda aplicar profilaxis antibiótica con cefalosporinas de primera generación o aminoglúcosidos antes de la nefrolitotomía percutánea. La biopsia prostática trans-rectal puede asociarse a complicaciones infecciosas, como infecciones del tracto urinario o prostatitis aguda, principalmente por Escherichia coli u otras enterobacterias. En pacientes sin factores de riesgo para gérmenes multirresistentes y urocultivo negativo se recomienda realizar profilaxis con amikacina o ceftriaxona endovenosas. En pacientes con urocultivo positivo, se realizará profilaxis según antibiograma, 24 horas previas a 24 horas post-procedimiento. Para el tratamiento dirigido de la prostatitis post-biopsia trans-rectal, los carbapenémicos durante 3-4 semanas son el tratamiento de elección.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Urinary/therapeutic use , Consensus , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Urinary Tract Infections/etiology , Argentina , Female , Humans , Lithotripsy/adverse effects , Male , Nephrolithiasis/complications , Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous/adverse effects , Prostatitis/drug therapy , Prostatitis/etiology , Risk Factors , Stents/adverse effects , Urinary Catheters/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI) are among the leading causes of health care-associated infections. The epidemiology of CDI has undergone major changes in the last decade, showing an increase in incidence, severity, and rate of relapse. These guidelines were developed by specialists from four scientific societies: Sociedad Argentina de Infectología (SADI), Sociedad Argentina de Gastroenterología (SAGE), Sociedad Argentina de Bacteriología, Micología y Parasitología Clínicas (SADEBAC) and Asociación de Enfermeras en Control de Infecciones (ADECI). The objective of these intersociety guidelines is to provide national recommendations on CDI diagnosis, treatment and prevention. The methodology used involved the systematic review of the bibliography available up to December 2018, which was performed by six groups formed ad hoc: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Treatment, Fecal Microbiota Transplantation, Special Populations, and Infection Control. The conclusions were presented and discussed in meetings held by each individual group and plenary meetings. In this document, updated diagnosis algorithms, therapeutic options (including fecal microbiota transplant) for immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients are presented, as well as strategies for the control of C. difficile infection.
Las infecciones por Clostridioides difficile están entre las principales causas de infecciones asociadas al sistema de salud. Su epidemiología ha sufrido importantes cambios en la última década con aumento en incidencia, gravedad y frecuencia de recidivas. El objetivo de este documento es brindar recomendaciones nacionales para el diagnóstico, el tratamiento y la prevención de las infecciones por C. difficile. Estas recomendaciones fueron elaboradas por especialistas pertenecientes a cuatro sociedades científicas de la República Argentina: Sociedad Argentina de Infectología (SADI), Sociedad Argentina de Gastroenterología (SAGE), Sociedad Argentina de Bacteriología, Micología y Parasitología Clínica (SADEBAC) y Asociación de Enfermeros en Control de Infecciones (ADECI). La metodología utilizada consistió en la revisión sistemática de la evidencia publicada hasta diciembre 2018. Seis grupos de especialistas fueron formados a tal fin: Epidemiología, Diagnóstico, Tratamiento, Trasplante de Microbiota Fecal, Poblaciones Especiales y Control de Infecciones. En reuniones individuales de grupo y plenarias se presentaron y discutieron las conclusiones y se elaboraron las recomendaciones. En este documento se actualizan los algoritmos diagnósticos, las opciones terapéuticas, incluido el trasplante de microbiota fecal, en paciente inmunocompetentes e inmunocomprometidos, y las medidas de control de infecciones por C. difficile.
Subject(s)
Clostridium Infections/diagnosis , Clostridium Infections/therapy , Argentina , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Clostridium Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Risk Factors , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
Introducción: Para mejorar la retención en el sistema de salud de las personas que viven con VIH (PVVIH) con diagnóstico reciente y promover su adherencia se implementó el programa de acompañamiento de pares "Positivos para Positivos" (PPP).Material y métodos: Se entrenó a PVVIH con excelente adherencia y se les ofreció integrar PPP. Entre 06/2014 y 08/2018 cada individuo con diagnóstico reciente de infección VIH fue invitado a contactar con PPP. Se evaluó prospectivamente la evolución de los pacientes durante un año y se analizaron variables vinculadas a adherencia. Se compararon sus resultados con lo observado entre PVVIH con diagnóstico reciente sin apoyo de pares. Se analizó mediante tablas de 2x2 y la prueba exacta de Fisher (EpiInfo7.2.2.6).Resultados: Se incluyeron 158 PVVIH (40 grupo intervención y 118 grupo control). En el grupo intervención hubo más pacientes que iniciaron TARGA [100% vs 87,3%; RR 1,15 (IC95 1,07-1,23); p=0,024]. Tras excluir a los derivados y fallecidos tempranamente quedaron 37 y 112 pacientes respectivamente. En el grupo intervención se observó mejor control clínico [94,6% vs 75,9%; RR 4,2 (IC95 1,08-16,6); p=0,015] y menos abandono de seguimiento [8,1% vs 25,9%; RR 0,3 (IC95 0,11-0,98); p=0,02]. Entre quienes iniciaron TARGA y tuvieron al menos una consulta con el servicio de Infectología (37 grupo intervención y 97 grupo control) se registraron más pacientes con alta tasa de retiro de TARGA de farmacia [51,4% vs 18,6%; RR 2,77 (IC95 1,644,66); p=0,0003]; mayor alcance de CV <50 [100% vs 85,1%; RR 1,18 (IC95 1,061,30); p=0,06]; y menos interrupciones RESUMENARTÍCULO ORIGINALISSN 2314-3193. Actualizaciones en sida e infectologiÌa. Buenos Aires. noviembre 2020. volumen 28. nuÌmero 103: 80-92no estructuradas del TARGA [10,8% vs 36,1%; RR 0,3 (IC95 0,110,78); p=0,008]. Conclusión: El acompañamiento de pares impactó positivamente en la adherencia de las PVVIH con diagnóstico reciente en el primer año de seguimiento
ntroduction: To improve retention in the health system of recently diagnosed people living with HIV (PLHIV) and promote their adherence, the "Positive for Positive" peer support program (PPP) was implemented.Materials and methods: PLHIV with excellent adherence were trained and offered to integrate PPP. Between June/2014 and August/2018 each individual with a recent diagnosis of HIV infection was invited to contact PPP. Patients were prospectively evaluated for one year and variables linked to adherence were analyzed. Their results were compared with those observed among recently diagnosed PLHIV without peer support. It was analyzed using 2x2 tables and Fisher's exact test (EpiInfo7.2.2.6).Results: 158 PLHIV were included (40 intervention group and 118 control group). In the intervention group more patients started HAART [100% vs 87.3%; RR 1.15 (IC95 1.07-1.23); p=0.024]. After excluding referrals and early deaths, remained 37 and 112 patients, respectively. In the intervention group there was better clinical control [94.6% vs 75.9%; RR 4.2 (IC95 1.08-16.6); p=0.015] and less dropout from follow-up [8.1% vs 25.9%; RR 0.3 (IC95 0.11-0.98); p=0.02]. Among those who initiated HAART and had at least one visit to the Infectious Disease Outpatient Clinic (37 intervention group and 97 control group), more patients showed a high refill rate (51.4% vs. 18.6%); RR 2.77 (IC95 1.64-4.66); p=0.0003]; greater achievement of undetectable viral load [100% vs 85.1%; RR 1.18 (IC95 1.06-1.30); p=0.06]; fewer unstructured HAART interruptions [10.8% vs 36.1%; RR 0.3 (IC95 0.11-0.78); p=0.008].Conclusion: Peer support had a positive impact on adherence among recently diagnosed PLHIV in the first year of follow-up
Subject(s)
Humans , Self-Help Groups , Health Programs and Plans/organization & administration , HIV , Patient Compliance , Anti-Retroviral Agents , Treatment Adherence and Compliance , HIV TestingABSTRACT
Introducción: El uso indiscriminado de antibióticos se asocia al incremento de la resistencia. En el cuidado de pacientes en estadios finales de enfermedades avanzadas, el manejo de antibióticos es objeto de controversias. Esta revisión evaluará la evidencia publicada sobre este tema, intentando responder a tres interrogantes. ¿Por qué se indican antibióticos en pacientes terminales? ¿Cuáles son las consecuencias potenciales? ¿Hay una única perspectiva? Discusión: La indicación de antibióticos en estadios finales de la vida obedece muchas veces a la inseguridad de los médicos con respecto a las ventajas y las desventajas de su utilización en este escenario, preferencias de pacientes y familiares, posibilidad de confort o control de síntomas y temor a problemas legales. Sin embargo, no está claro el beneficio de los antibióticos en el control de síntomas ni su impacto en la supervivencia.Conclusiones: La Comisión de Uso Adecuado de Recursos de SADI propone analizar y considerar en cada caso: 1) La decisión de prescribir antibióticos deber ser consensuada con el paciente y sus familiares; 2) Al ingreso de pacientes con enfermedades terminales se deben establecer las posibles conductas a adoptar ante un cuadro infeccioso; 3) Las instituciones deben desarrollar programas tendientes a proteger al paciente y empoderar a los profesionales en la toma de determinaciones; 4) Los programas institucionales de antibióticos deben intervenir en la toma de decisiones en este escenario; 5) El Equipo de Cuidados Paliativos debe ser involucrado en el proceso. Evitar el sobreuso de antibióticos es una consideración esencial de salud pública para minimizar la resistencia antimicrobiana
ntroduction: The indiscriminate use of antibiotics is associated with increased resistance. In the care of patients in late stages of advanced diseases, antibiotic management is the subject of multiple controversies. In this review we will evaluate the published evidence on this topic, based on the answer to three questions: why are antibiotics indicated in terminal patients? What are the potential consequences? Is there a single perspective?Discussion: The indication of antibiotics in the final stages of life is often due to doctors' insecurity regarding the advantages and disadvantages of their use in this scenario, patient and family preferences, possibility of comfort or symptom control, and fear of legal problems. However, the benefit of antibiotics in symptom control or their impact on survival is not clear.Conclusions: The SADI Appropriate Use of Resources Commission proposes to analyze in each case: 1) The decision of prescribing antibiotics must be taken together with the patients and/or his family; 2) At the entrance of patients with terminal illnesses, the possible behaviors to be adopted before an infectious condition must be established; 3) Institutions should develop programs aimed at protecting the patient and empowering professionals in making determinations; 4) The Institutional Antibiotic Program must intervene in decision-making in this scenario; 5) The Palliative Care Team must be involved in the process. Avoiding antibiotic overuse is an essential public health consideration to minimize antimicrobial resistance.
Subject(s)
Humans , Palliative Care , Terminal Care , Critical Illness/therapy , Decision Making , Antimicrobial Stewardship , Informed ConsentABSTRACT
El concepto de neumonía asociada a cuidados de la salud (NACS) surgió a partir de la presunción de que los patógenos causantes del cuadro tendrían mayores probabilidades de ser microorganismos multiresistentes (MOMR), por lo que el esquema de tratamiento antibiótico debía ser diferente al requerido en neumonía adquirida en la comunidad (NAC). Sin embargo, la evidencia que sustenta esa idea no es lo suficientemente robusta. Dado lo complejo del tema, y su elevado impacto en el consumo exagerado de antibióticos, se presenta esta revisión. Es posible que la ausencia de los factores de riesgo usualmente descriptos, o la presencia de solo uno, sugiera poca probabilidad deMOMR, por lo que el abordaje terapéutico debería ser similaral de NAC. Por el contrario, ante la acumulación de factoresde riesgo o frente a cuadros severos se podría considerarla cobertura de MOMR mediante un esquema de espectroampliado
The concept of health-care-associated pneumonia (HCAP) arose from the presumption that the pathogens that cause the disease would be more likely to be multi-resistant microorganisms (MRMO), so the antibiotic treatment scheme should be different from the one required in community acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, the evidence supporting this idea is not robust enough. Given the complexity of the topic, and its high impact on the exaggerated consumption of antibiotics, this review is presented. It is possible that the absence of risk factors usually described, or the presence of only one, suggests a low probability of MRMO, so the therapeutic approach should be similar to that ofCAP. On the contrary, in view of the accumulation of risk factors or in severecases, MRMO coverage could be considered, through an extended spectrum scheme
Subject(s)
Humans , Pneumonia/therapy , Ancillary Services, Hospital , Patient Care Management , Prospective Studies , Antimicrobial Stewardship , Health Services for the AgedABSTRACT
Antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis is empirically chosen, based on epidemiological information. Resistance rates are different between regions and there are limited data on the situation in Argentina. As a part of a multicenter, observational study of abdominal infections, we performed the analysis of adult patients diagnosed with appendicitis, enrolled in 16 centers of 5 provinces, between Jan/01/2014 and Jun/30/2015. The aim was to analyze the prevalent aerobic pathogens, their resistance rates and the antimicrobial prescription pattern. On a total of 131 appendicitis cases analyzed, we found 184 aerobic pathogens (1.4 bacteria/episode): Escherichia coli 106 (57.6%), Klebsiella spp 16 (8.7%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa 19 (10.3%), Enterobacter spp. 2 (1%), other Gram negative bacilli 5 (2.7%); Enterococcus spp. 16 (8.7%) and other Gram positive cocci 20 (10.9%). The resistance rate of E. coli and enterobacteria to ampicillin/sulbactam was greater than 34% and greater than 31% to ciprofloxacin. However, the resistance of enterobacteria to piperacillin/tazobactam was 4.8%, to ceftriaxone 9.5%, to amikacin 3.6% and 8.2% to gentamicin. No resistance to carbapenems was found. The choice of quinolones or ampicillin/sulbactam for the treatment of appendicitis should be discouraged in our context, due to the high rates of resistance found in this prevalent etiology. Aminoglycoside-based treatments should be considered, given the findings of high antibiotic susceptibility and their low impact on the induction of resistance.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Appendicitis/microbiology , Gram-Negative Bacteria/classification , Gram-Positive Bacteria/classification , Intraabdominal Infections/microbiology , Sepsis/microbiology , Acute Disease , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Argentina , Female , Gram-Negative Bacteria/drug effects , Gram-Positive Bacteria/drug effects , Humans , Male , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Young AdultABSTRACT
El tratamiento antibiótico de las apendicitis agudas se decide empíricamente basándose en la información epidemiológica. Las resistencias son variables entre regiones y los datos de Argentina son escasos. En el contexto de un estudio multicéntrico, observacional, de infecciones abdominales, se efectuó el análisis de los pacientes adultos con diagnóstico de apendicitis, incorporados al estudio entre enero 2014 y junio 2015, en 16 centros de 5 provincias argentinas. El objetivo fue analizar los gérmenes aeróbicos prevalentes, su resistencia a antibióticos y el patrón de prescripción antimicrobiana. Se estudiaron 131 apendicitis. Se aislaron 184 bacterias aerobias (1.4 bacterias/episodio): Escherichia coli 106 (57.6%), Klebsiella spp 16 (8.7%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa 19 (10.3%), Enterobacter spp. 2 (1%), otros bacilos Gram negativos 5 (2.7%). Enterococcus spp. 16 (8.7%) y otros cocos Gram positivos 20 (10.9%). La resistencia de E. coli y enterobacterias a ampicilina/sulbactam fue mayor a 34% y a ciprofloxacina mayor a 31%. En cambio, la resistencia de enterobacterias a piperacilina/tazobactam fue 4.8%, a ceftriaxona 9.5% y no se halló resistencia a carbapenemes. Respecto a amikacina fue 3.6% y a gentamicina 8.2%. En función de los resultados, el uso de quinolonas o de ampicilina/sulbactam para el tratamiento de las apendicitis debiera ser desaconsejado. Los esquemas basados en aminoglucósidos debieran ser jerarquizados en función de la sensibilidad hallada y su bajo impacto en la inducción de resistencias.
Antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis is empirically chosen, based on epidemiological information. Resistance rates are different between regions and there are limited data on the situation in Argentina. As a part of a multicenter, observational study of abdominal infections, we performed the analysis of adult patients diagnosed with appendicitis, enrolled in 16 centers of 5 provinces, between Jan/01/2014 and Jun/30/2015. The aim was to analyze the prevalent aerobic pathogens, their resistance rates and the antimicrobial prescription pattern. On a total of 131 appendicitis cases analyzed, we found 184 aerobic pathogens (1.4 bacteria/episode): Escherichia coli 106 (57.6%), Klebsiella spp 16 (8.7%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa 19 (10.3%), Enterobacter spp. 2 (1%), other Gram negative bacilli 5 (2.7%); Enterococcus spp. 16 (8.7%) and other Gram positive cocci 20 (10.9%). The resistance rate of E. coli and enterobacteria to ampicillin/sulbactam was greater than 34% and greater than 31% to ciprofloxacin. However, the resistance of enterobacteria to piperacillin/tazobactam was 4.8%, to ceftriaxone 9.5%, to amikacin 3.6% and 8.2% to gentamicin. No resistance to carbapenems was found. The choice of quinolones or ampicillin/sulbactam for the treatment of appendicitis should be discouraged in our context, due to the high rates of resistance found in this prevalent etiology. Aminoglycoside-based treatments should be considered, given the findings of high antibiotic susceptibility and their low impact on the induction of resistance.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Young Adult , Appendicitis/microbiology , Sepsis/microbiology , Intraabdominal Infections/microbiology , Gram-Negative Bacteria/classification , Gram-Positive Bacteria/classification , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Argentina , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Acute Disease , Prospective Studies , Gram-Negative Bacteria/drug effects , Gram-Positive Bacteria/drug effectsABSTRACT
No disponible