Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) and Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (MLR) Are Predictors of Good Outcomes in Surgical Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infections of Lower Limbs: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that develops after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), whose incidence is expected to increase over the years. Traditionally, surgical treatment of PJI has been based on algorithms, where early infections are preferably treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and late infections with two-stage revision surgery. Two-stage revision is considered the "gold standard" for treatment of chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as it enables local delivery of antibiotics, maintenance of limb-length and mobility, and easier reimplantation. Many studies have attempted to identify potential predicting factors for early diagnosis of PJI, but its management remains challenging. In this observational retrospective study, we investigated the potential role of inflammatory blood markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI)) as prognostic factors in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted, collecting clinical data and laboratory parameters from patients submitted to prosthetic explantation (EP) for chronic PJI. Laboratory parameters (PCR, NLR, MLR, PLR, SIRI, SII, and AISI) were evaluated at the explantation time; at 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery; and at reimplantation time. The correlation between laboratory parameters and surgery success was evaluated and defined as infection absence/resolution at the last follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 57 patients with PJI were evaluated (62% males; average age 70 years, SD 12.14). Fifty-three patients with chronic PJI were included. Nine patients underwent DAIR revision surgery and chronic suppressive therapy; two patients died. Nineteen patients completed the two-stage revision process (prosthetic removal, spacer placement, and subsequent replanting). Among them, none showed signs of reinfection or persistence of infection at the last available follow-up. The other twenty-three patients did not replant due to persistent infection: among them, some (the most) underwent spacer retention; others (fewer in number) were submitted to resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis (Girdlestone technique) or chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy; the remaining were, over time, lost to follow-up. Of the patients who concluded the two-stage revision, the ones with high SIRI values (mean 3.08 SD 1.7 and p-value 0.04) and MLR values (mean 0.4 SD 0.2 and p-value 0.02) at the explantation time were associated with a higher probability of infection resolution. Moreover, higher variation in the SIRI and PCR, also defined, respectively, as delta-SIRI (mean -2.3 SD 1.8 and p-value 0.03) and delta-PCR (mean -46 SD 35.7 and p-value 0.03), were associated with favorable outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that, in patients with PJI undergoing EP, the SIRI and MLR values and delta-SIRI and delta-PCR values could be predictive of a favorable outcome. The evaluation of these laboratory indices, especially their determination at 4 weeks after removal, could therefore help to determine which patients could be successfully replanted and to identify the best time to replant. More studies analyzing a wider cohort of patients with chronic PJI are needed to validate the promising results of this study.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with hematologic diseases receiving tixagevimab/cilgavimab as pre-exposure prophylaxis in most recent Omicron sublineages era.

OBJECTIVES: Whether pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tixagevimab/cilgavimab 150 mg/150 mg (T/C) in individuals with hematologic disease (HD) may lead to a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection (BTI)/hospitalization, or death in the Omicron era remains to be established. METHODS: An observational study included participants with HD who received PrEP. BTIs were defined as SARS-CoV-2 positivity by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. The incidence of BTIs (95% CI) and of BTIs/hospitalization/death was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and as the number of BTIs per 100 person-years of follow-up according to the circulating variant of concern (VoC). A Poisson regression model was used to evaluate the association between the rate of incidence and circulating VoCs after controlling for demographics and clinical factors. RESULTS: We included 550 HD patients: 71% initiated T/C PrEP when BA.5 was the most prevalent, followed by XBB/EG, BA.2, and BA.1 (19%, 7%, and 3%, respectively). Overall, the 1-year incidence estimate of BTIs/hospitalization/death was 24% (18.7-29.4%). A greater risk of incident infections was observed when BA.5 and XBB/EG sub-lineages circulated (aRR 5.05 [2.17, 11.77]; P < .001 and 3.82 [1.50, 9.7]; P = 0.005, compared to BA.1, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The 1-year incidence of SARS-CoV-2 BTIs/hospitalization/death was 24% which is in line with what was observed in other similar studies. The risk appeared to be higher when more recent Omicron sub-lineages were circulating suggesting a reduction of in vitro neutralization.

Early assessment of blood culture negativity as a potential support tool for antimicrobial stewardship.

Objective: To assess whether 48-h negative blood culture (BC) bottles are still negative at the classic 120-h incubation endpoint and whether 48 h might be the time to make antimicrobial therapy decisions. Methods: Data from the first collected bottles from bloodstream infection (BSI) episodes of single patients were retrospectively analyzed. Probabilities of bottles being negative at the classic endpoint were calculated from 0 to 120 h of incubation. Results: Among BC-negative episodes (4018/4901 [82.0%]), most (2097/4018 (52.2%) occurred in medicine patients. At 48 h, probability was 100.0% (95% CI, 99.9-100.0) for all 4018 patients. Of these, 1244 (31.0%) patients remained on antibiotics until 120 h. Excluding 401 (32.2%) patients who received antibiotics for another (non-bloodstream) infection, 843 (67.8%) of 1244 patients could have merited early (48-h) discontinuation of antibiotics. Stopping treatment in these patients would have led to saving 5201 days of access (943 [18.1%] days), watch (3624 [69.7%] days), or reserve (634 [12.2%]) AWaRe groups' antibiotics, which correspond to 65.6% (5201/7928) of days of administered antibiotics in all 1244 patients. Conclusion: As an early indicator of BC negativity, the 48-h endpoint could reliably support antimicrobial stewardship, but the clinical judgment remains imperative especially when BSI is highly suspected.

Vaccines and Myocardial Injury in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 Infection: the CardioCOVID-Gemelli Study.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial injury is prevalent among patients hospitalized for COVID-19. However, the role of COVID-19 vaccines in modifying the risk of myocardial injury is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the role of vaccines in modifying the risk of myocardial injury in COVID-19. METHODS: We enrolled COVID-19 patients admitted from March 2021 to February 2022 with known vaccination status and ≥1 assessment of hs-cTnI within 30 days from the admission. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of myocardial injury (hs-cTnI levels >99th percentile upper reference limit). RESULTS: 1019 patients were included (mean age 67.7±14.8 years, 60.8% male, 34.5% vaccinated against COVID-19). Myocardial injury occurred in 145 (14.2%) patients. At multivariate logistic regression analysis, advanced age, chronic kidney disease and hypertension, but not vaccination status, were independent predictors of myocardial injury. In the analysis according to age tertiles distribution, myocardial injury occurred more frequently in the III tertile (≥76 years) compared to other tertiles (I tertile:≤60 years;II tertile:61-75 years) (p<0.001). Moreover, in the III tertile, vaccination was protective against myocardial injury (OR 0.57, CI 95% 0.34-0.94; p=0.03), while a previous history of coronary artery disease was an independent positive predictor. In contrast, in the I tertile, chronic kidney disease (OR 6.94, 95% CI 1.31-36.79, p=0.02) and vaccination (OR 4.44, 95% CI 1.28-15.34, p=0.02) were independent positive predictors of myocardial injury. CONCLUSIONS: In patients ≥76 years, COVID-19 vaccines were protective for the occurrence of myocardial injury, while in patients ≤60 years, myocardial injury was associated with previous COVID-19 vaccination. Further studies are warranted to clarify the underlying mechanisms.

A Machine Learning Predictive Model of Bloodstream Infection in Hospitalized Patients.

The aim of the study was to build a machine learning-based predictive model to discriminate between hospitalized patients at low risk and high risk of bloodstream infection (BSI). A Data Mart including all patients hospitalized between January 2016 and December 2019 with suspected BSI was built. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to develop a clinically interpretable machine learning predictive model. The model was trained on 2016-2018 data and tested on 2019 data. A feature selection based on a univariate logistic regression first selected candidate predictors of BSI. A multivariate logistic regression with stepwise feature selection in five-fold cross-validation was applied to express the risk of BSI. A total of 5660 hospitalizations (4026 and 1634 in the training and the validation subsets, respectively) were included. Eleven predictors of BSI were identified. The performance of the model in terms of AUROC was 0.74. Based on the interquartile predicted risk score, 508 (31.1%) patients were defined as being at low risk, 776 (47.5%) at medium risk, and 350 (21.4%) at high risk of BSI. Of them, 14.2% (72/508), 30.8% (239/776), and 64% (224/350) had a BSI, respectively. The performance of the predictive model of BSI is promising. Computational infrastructure and machine learning models can help clinicians identify people at low risk for BSI, ultimately supporting an antibiotic stewardship approach.

Association of piperacillin/tazobactam MIC and mortality in a cohort of ceftriaxone-resistant Escherichia coli bloodstream infections treated with piperacillin/tazobactam and carbapenems: a multicentric propensity score-weighted observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of piperacillin/tazobactam MICs on in-hospital 30 day mortality in patients with third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Escherichia coli bloodstream infection treated with piperacillin/tazobactam, compared with those treated with carbapenems. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted in three large academic hospitals in Italy between 2018 and 2022. The study population comprised patients with monomicrobial third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E. coli bloodstream infection, who received either piperacillin/tazobactam or carbapenem therapy within 48 h of blood culture collection. The primary outcome was in-hospital 30 day all-cause mortality. A propensity score was used to estimate the likelihood of receiving empirical piperacillin/tazobactam treatment. Cox regression models were performed to ascertain risk factors independently associated with in-hospital 30 day mortality. RESULTS: Of the 412 consecutive patients included in the study, 51% received empirical therapy with piperacillin/tazobactam, while 49% received carbapenem therapy. In the propensity-adjusted multiple Cox model, the Pitt bacteraemia score [HR 1.38 (95% CI, 0.85-2.16)] and piperacillin/tazobactam MICs of 8 mg/L [HR 2.35 (95% CI, 1.35-3.95)] and ≥16 mg/L [HR 3.69 (95% CI, 1.86-6.91)] were significantly associated with increased in-hospital 30 day mortality, while the empirical use of piperacillin/tazobactam was not found to predict in-hospital 30 day mortality [HR 1.38 (95% CI, 0.85-2.16)]. CONCLUSIONS: Piperacillin/tazobactam use might not be associated with increased mortality in treating third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E. coli bloodstream infections when the MIC is <8 mg/L.

Identification of two anti-Candida antibodies associated with the survival of patients with candidemia.

IMPORTANCE: Candidemia (bloodstream invasion by Candida species) is a major fungal disease in humans. Despite the recent progress in diagnosis and treatment, therapeutic options are limited and under threat of antimicrobial resistance. The disease mortality remains high (around 40%). In contrast with deep-seated invasive candidiasis, particularly that occurring in patients with hematologic malignancies and organ transplants, patients with candidemia are often not immunocompromised and therefore able to mount memory anticandidal immune responses, perhaps primed by Candida commensalism. We investigated antibody immunity in candidemia patients and report here on the ability of these patients to produce antibodies that react with Candida antigens. In particular, the patients with high titers of IgG reactive with two immunodominant, virulence-associated antigens (Als3 and MP65) had a higher 30-day survival. If confirmed by controlled, prospective clinical studies, our data could inform the development of antibody therapy to better treat a severe fungal infection such as candidiasis.

The role of long-acting antibiotics in the clinical practice: a narrative review.

Introduction: The increasing emergence of bacterial strains with new resistance determinants has become a threat to current antibiotic therapies in recent years. This has prompted research for innovative options with improved efficacy and safety profiles: long-acting glycopeptides, such as dalbavancin and oritavancin, are currently approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Their efficacy, microbiological profile, and ease of administration may provide an answer to this challenge, as well as reducing length of stay and hospital costs. This narrative review aims to explore the current evidence on the real-word use of dalbavancin and oritavancin, in labelled and off-label indications in clinical practice. Methods: A PubMed library database search with no time limits was performed using the following terms: long-acting antibiotics, dalbavancin, oritavancin. Discussion: Registration studies confirmed non-inferiority of long-acting glycopeptides to standard of care in ABSSSI (dalbavancin DISCOVER 1 and 2: 79.7% clinical success in the dalbavancin group and 79.8% in the vancomycin-linezolid group; oritavancin SOLO I: 82,3% clinical success in the oritavancin group versus 78,9% for the vancomycin group; SOLO II: 80,1% clinical success versus 82,9%). Large cohorts have confirmed similar success rates in ABSSSI treatment in real-world practice. Evidence for off-label indications is still rather scarce but promising, especially in bone and joint infections therapy for both dalbavancin and oritavancin, and infective endocarditis for dalbavancin. Moreover, these drugs may have their place in non-adherent patients, in setting of addition or difficult access to healthcare. Another potential use of these drugs is in patients with oral intake impairment or reduced gastro-intestinal absorption. However, the low penetration in cerebrospinal fluid of dalbavancin and the unfavourable outcomes in the only case report of oritavancin treatment in human meningitis despite encouraging animal models would seem to make these molecules unsuitable for central nervous system infection therapy. Most of the available evidence is based on small retrospective cohorts, so robust prospective studies investigating off-label indications are needed.

Epidemiology, time course, and risk factors for hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in a cohort of 14,884 patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 pandemic has changed in-hospital care and was linked to superimposed infections. Here, we described epidemiology and risk factors for hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HA-BSIs), before and during COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, single-center real-life study included 14,884 patients admitted to hospital wards and intensive care units (ICUs) with at least one blood culture, drawn 48 h after admission, either before (pre-COVID, N = 7382) or during pandemic (N = 7502, 1203 COVID-19+ and 6299 COVID-19-). RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred and forty-five HA-BSI were microbiologically confirmed in 14,884 patients (15.1%), significantly higher among COVID-19+ (22.9%; ptrend < .001). COVID-19+ disclosed a significantly higher mortality rate (33.8%; p < .001) and more ICU admissions (29.7%; p < .001). Independent HAI-BSI predictors were: COVID-19 (OR: 1.43, 95%CI: 1.21-1.69; p < .001), hospitalization length (OR: 1.04, 95%CI: 1.03-1.04; p < .001), ICU admission (OR: 1.38, 95%CI: 1.19-1.60; p < .001), neoplasms (OR:1.48, 95%CI: 1.34-1.65; p < .001) and kidney failure (OR: 1.81, 95%CI: 1.61-2.04; p < .001). Of note, HA-BSI IRs for Acinetobacter spp. (0.16 × 100 patient-days) and Staphylococcus aureus (0.24 × 100 patient-days) peaked during the interval between first and second pandemic waves in our National context. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HA-BSI admitted before and during pandemic substantially differed. COVID-19 represented a risk factor for HA-BSI, though not confirmed in the sole pandemic period. Some etiologies emerged between pandemic waves, suggesting potential COVID-19 long-term effect on HA-BSIs.

Association of Delirium and Depression with Respiratory and Outcome Measures in COVID-19 Inpatients.

Delirium (DEL) and depression (DEP) may impair the course and severity of acute respiratory illness. The impact of such syndromes on respiratory and outcome parameters in inpatients with COVID-19 needs clarification. To clarify the relationship between DEL and DEP and respiratory outcome measures, we enrolled 100 inpatients from COVID-19 units of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS of Rome. Participants were divided into those with DEL, DEP, or absence of either delirium or depression (CONT). Delirium severity was assessed with the Neelson and Champagne Confusion Scale (NEECHAM). Psychopathology was assessed with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Dependent variables include: (a) respiratory parameters, i.e., partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2), ratio between arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), and fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2); (b) outcome parameters, i.e., duration of hospitalization and number of pharmacological treatments used during the hospitalization. We investigated between-group differences and the relationships between severity of delirium/depression and the dependent variables. Duration of hospitalization was longer for DEL than for either DEP or CONT and for DEP compared to CONT. NEECHAM and HAM-D scores predicted lower PaO2 and PaO2/FiO2 levels in the DEL and DEP groups, respectively. In DEP, BPRS scores positively correlated with duration of hospitalization. Delirium impacted the course of COVID-19 more severely than depression. The mechanisms by which delirium and depression worsen respiratory parameters differ.

Cefiderocol-containing regimens for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii ventilator-associated pneumonia: a propensity-weighted cohort study.

Background: Cefiderocol is a novel ß-lactam with activity against carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), but its role in CRAB pulmonary infections is controversial due to limited evidence. Objectives: To assess the association between cefiderocol-containing regimens treatment and 28-day mortality in carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Methods: An observational cohort study including critically ill COVID-19 patients with CRAB-VAP admitted to two ICUs of a large academic hospital in Rome between September 2020 and December 2022. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. A propensity score was created to balance the cefiderocol- and non-cefiderocol-containing groups. A propensity-weighted multiple logistic regression model was calculated to evaluate risk factors for 28-day mortality. Survival curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: 121 patients were enrolled, 55 were treated with cefiderocol- and 66 with non-cefiderocol-containing regimens. The 28-day all-cause mortality was 56% (68/121). A statistically significant difference in 28-day mortality was found between cefiderocol- and non-cefiderocol- containing regimens groups (44% versus 67%, P = 0.011). In the propensity-adjusted multiple logistic regression, cefiderocol (OR 0.35 95% CI 0.14, 0.83) was a predictor of 28-day survival, Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.36 95% CI 1.16, 1.78), SOFA score (OR 1.24 95% CI 1.09, 1.57) and septic shock (OR 3.71 95% CI 1.44, 12.73) were all associated with increased 28-day mortality. Conclusion: Cefiderocol-containing regimens were associated with reduced 28-day mortality in CRAB-VAP. The sample size and the observational design limit the study's conclusions. Future RCTs are needed to establish cefiderocol's definite role in these infections.

Neuropsychological measures of post-COVID-19 cognitive status.

Background: COVID-19 may result in persistent symptoms in the post-acute phase, including cognitive and neurological ones. The aim of this study is to investigate the cognitive and neurological features of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 evaluated in the post-acute phase through a direct neuropsychological evaluation. Methods: Individuals recovering from COVID-19 were assessed in an out-patient practice with a complete neurological evaluation and neuropsychological tests (Mini-Mental State Examination; Rey Auditory Verbal Test, Multiple Feature Target Cancellation Test, Trial Making Test, Digit Span Forward and Backward, and Frontal Assessment Battery). Pre- and post-COVID-19 global and mental health status was assessed along with the history of the acute phase of infection. Post-COVID-19 cognitive status was modeled by combining persistent self-reported COVID-related cognitive symptoms and pathologic neuropsychological tests. Results: A total of 406 individuals (average age 54.5 ± 15.1 years, 45.1% women) were assessed on average at 97.8 ± 48.0 days since symptom onset. Persistent self-reported neurological symptoms were found in the areas of sleep (32%), attention (31%), and memory (22%). The MMSE mean score was 28.6. In total, 84 subjects (20.7%) achieved pathologic neuropsychological test results. A high prevalence of failed tests was found in digit span backward (18.7%), trail making (26.6%), and frontal assessment battery (10.9%). Cognitive status was associated with a number of factors including cardiovascular disease history, persistent fatigue, female sex, age, anxiety, and mental health stress. Conclusion: COVID-19 is capable of eliciting persistent measurable neurocognitive alterations particularly relevant in the areas of attention and working memory. These neurocognitive disorders have been associated with some potentially treatable factors and others that may stratify risk at an early stage.

Association between Older Age and Psychiatric Symptoms in a Population of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

Increased rates of anxiety and depression have been reported for older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known regarding the onset of mental health morbidity during the acute phase of the disease and the role of age as potential independent risk factor for psychiatric symptoms. The cross-sectional association between older age and psychiatric symptoms has been estimated in a sample of 130 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the first and second wave of the pandemic. Compared to younger patients, those who were 70 years of age or older resulted at a higher risk of psychiatric symptoms measured on the Brief Psychiatric Symptoms Rating Scale (BPRS) (adjusted (adj.) odds ratio (OR) 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-5.30) and delirium (adj. OR 5.24, 95% CI 1.63-16.8)). No association was found between older age and depressive symptoms or anxiety. Age was associated with psychiatric symptoms independently of gender, marital status, history of psychiatric illness, severity of disease and cardiovascular morbidity. Older adults appear at high risk of developing psychiatric symptoms related to COVID-19 disease during hospital stay. Multidisciplinary preventive and therapeutic interventions should be implemented to reduce the risk of psychiatric morbidity and related adverse health care outcomes among older hospital inpatients with COVID-19.

Complications associated with the use of peripherally inserted central catheters and midline catheters in COVID-19 patients: An observational prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Among the many interesting aspects of clinical care during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, vascular access still deserves some attention. Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and midline catheters (MCs) are venous access devices inserted by ultrasound-guided puncture of veins of the arm, which have been associated with the possibility of minimizing infectious complications in different populations of patients. We have investigated their performance in SARS-CoV-2 patients. METHODS: As the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 is still unclear, we have designed a single-center, prospective observational study enrolling all patients with established diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection who were admitted to our hospital in the period between October 2020 and April 2021 and who required either a PICC or a MC. RESULTS: We recruited 227 patients. The cumulative incidence of CRBSI was 4.35% (10 cases), that is, 3.5 episodes/1,000 catheter days. Four CRBSI occurred in patients with PICCs (4.5/1,000 catheter days) and 6 in those with MCs (3.2/1,000 catheter days). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that COVID-19 patients may have a more pronounced tendency for the development of catheter-related infections compared to other populations of patients.

Empiric Antifungal Therapy for Intra-Abdominal Post-Surgical Abscesses in Non-ICU Patients.

The role of empiric antifungals for post-surgical abscesses (PSAs) is controversial, and international guidelines on invasive mycoses focus on bloodstream infections. We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 319 patients with PSA at a tertiary-level hospital in Italy during the years 2013-2018. Factors associated with empiric antifungal administration were analyzed and compared with factors associated with fungal isolation from the abdomen. Forty-six patients (14.4%) received empiric antifungals (65.2% azoles). Candida was isolated in 34/319 (10.7%) cases, always with bacteria. Only 11/46 patients receiving empirical antifungals had abdominal Candida. Only 11/34 patients with a fungal isolate received empiric antifungal therapy. Upper GI surgery (OR: 4.76 (CI: 1.95-11.65), p = 0.001), an intensive care unit stay in the previous 90 days (OR: 5.01 (CI: 1.63-15.33), p = 0.005), and reintervention within 30 days (OR: 2.52 (CI: 1.24-5.13), p = 0.011) were associated with empiric antifungals in a multivariate analysis, while pancreas/biliary tract surgery was associated with fungal isolation (OR: 2.25 (CI: 1.03-4.91), p = 0.042), and lower GI surgery was protective (OR: 0.30 (CI: 0.10-0.89), p = 0.029) in a univariate analysis. The criteria for empiric antifungal therapy in our practice seem to be inconsistent with the risk factors for actual fungal isolation. Better guidance for empiric therapy should be provided by wider studies.

Anakinra in hospitalized COVID-19 patients guided by baseline soluble urokinase plasminogen receptor plasma levels: A real world, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with COVID-19 and baseline soluble urokinase plasminogen receptor plasma (suPAR) levels ≥ 6ng/mL, early administration of anakinra, a recombinant interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, may prevent disease progression and death. In case of suPAR testing unavailability, the Severe COvid Prediction Estimate (SCOPE) score may be used as an alternative in guiding treatment decisions. METHODS: We conducted a monocenter, retrospective cohort study, including patients with SARS-CoV2 infection and respiratory failure. Patients treated with anakinra (anakinra group, AG) were compared to two control groups of patients who did not receive anakinra, respectively with ≥ 6 ng/mL (CG1) and < 6 ng/mL (CG2) baseline suPAR levels. Controls were manually paired by age, sex, date of admission and vaccination status and, for patients with high baseline suPAR, propensity score weighting for receiving anakinra was applied. Primary endpoint of the study was disease progression at day 14 from admission, as defined by patient distribution on a simplified version of the 11-point World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale (WHO-CPS). RESULTS: Between July, 2021 and January, 2022, 153 patients were included, among which 56 were treated with off-label anakinra, 49 retrospectively fulfilled prescriptive criteria for anakinra and were assigned to CG1, and 48 presented with suPAR levels < 6ng/mL and were assigned to CG2. At day 14, when comparing to CG1, patients who received anakinra had significantly reduced odds of progressing towards worse clinical outcome both in ordinal regression analysis (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11-0.54, p<0.001) and in propensity-adjusted multiple logistic regression analysis (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12-0.82, p = 0.021) thus controlling for a wide number of covariates. Sensitivities of baseline suPAR and SCOPE score in predicting progression towards severe disease or death at day 14 were similar (83% vs 100%, p = 0.59). CONCLUSION: This real-word, retrospective cohort study confirmed the safety and the efficacy of suPAR-guided, early use of anakinra in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure.

Incidence of bloodstream infections due to multidrug-resistant pathogens in ordinary wards and intensive care units before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a real-life, retrospective observational study.

PURPOSE: SARS-COV-2 pandemic led to antibiotic overprescription and unprecedented stress on healthcare systems worldwide. Knowing the comparative incident risk of bloodstream infection due to multidrug-resistant pathogens in COVID ordinary wards and intensive care-units may give insights into the impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial resistance. METHODS: Single-center observational data extracted from a computerized dataset were used to identify all patients who underwent blood cultures from January 1, 2018 to May 15, 2021. Pathogen-specific incidence rates were compared according to the time of admission, patient's COVID status and ward type. RESULTS: Among 14,884 patients for whom at least one blood culture was obtained, a total of 2534 were diagnosed with HA-BSI. Compared to both pre-pandemic and COVID-negative wards, HA-BSI due to S. aureus and Acinetobacter spp. (respectively 0.3 [95% CI 0.21-0.32] and 0.11 [0.08-0.16] new infections per 100 patient-days) showed significantly higher incidence rates, peaking in the COVID-ICU setting. Conversely, E. coli incident risk was 48% lower in COVID-positive vs COVID-negative settings (IRR 0.53 [0.34-0.77]). Among COVID + patients, 48% (n = 38/79) of S. aureus isolates were resistant to methicillin and 40% (n = 10/25) of K. pneumoniae isolates were resistant to carbapenems. CONCLUSIONS: The data presented here indicate that the spectrum of pathogens causing BSI in ordinary wards and intensive care units varied during the pandemic, with the greatest shift experienced by COVID-ICUs. Antimicrobial resistance of selected high-priority bacteria was high in COVID positive settings.

BIOMARKERS: CAN THEY REALLY GUIDE OUR DAILY PRACTICE?

ABSTRACT: Optimal management of septic patients requires accurate assessment of both current severity status and prognosis. Since the 1990s, substantial advances have been made in the use of circulating biomarkers for such assessments. This summary of the session on "Biomarkers: can they really use guide our daily practice?" presented at the 2021 WEB-CONFERENCE OF THE EUROPEAN SHOCK SOCIETY, 6 November 2021. These biomarkers include ultrasensitive detection of bacteremia, circulating soluble urokina-type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR), C-reactive protein (CRP) and ferritin and procalcitonin. In addition, the potential application of novel multiwavelength optical biosensor technology allows noninvasive monitoring of multiple metabolites that can be used to assess severity and prognosis in septic patients. The application these biomarkers and improved technologies provide the potential for improved personalized management of septic patients.

Sarilumab plus standard of care vs standard of care for the treatment of severe COVID-19: a phase 3, randomized, open-labeled, multi-center study (ESCAPE study).

Background: Among interleukin-6 inhibitors suggested for use in COVID-19, there are few robust evidences for the efficacy of sarilumab. Herein, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in severe COVID-19. Methods: In this phase 3, open-labeled, randomized clinical trial, conducted at 5 Italian hospitals, adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (excluding mechanically ventilated) were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous sarilumab (400 mg, repeatable after 12 h) plus standard of care (SOC) (arm A) or to continue SOC (arm B). Randomization was web-based. As post-hoc analyses, the participants were stratified according to baseline inflammatory parameters. The primary endpoint was analysed on the modified Intention-To-Treat population, including all the randomized patients who received any study treatment (sarilumab or SOC). It was time to clinical improvement of 2 points on a 7-points ordinal scale, from baseline to day 30. We used Kaplan Meier method and log-rank test to compare the primary outcome between two arms, and Cox regression stratified by clinical center and adjusted for severity of illness, to estimate the hazard ratio (HR). The trial was registered with EudraCT (2020-001390-76). Findings: Between May 2020 and May 2021, 191 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom, excluding nine dropouts, 176 were assigned to arm A (121) and B (55). At day 30, no significant differences in the primary endpoint were found (88% [95% CI 81-94] in arm A vs 85% [74-93], HR 1.07 [0.8-1.5] in arm B; log-rank p = 0.50). After stratifying for inflammatory parameters, arm A showed higher probability of improvement than B without statistical significance in the strata with C reactive protein (CRP) < 7 mg/dL (88% [77-96] vs 79% [63-91], HR 1.55 [0.9-2.6]; log-rank p = 0.049) and in the strata with lymphocytes <870/mmc (90% [79-96]) vs (73% [55-89], HR 1.53 [0.9-2.7]; log-rank p = 0.058). Overall, 39/121 (32%) AEs were reported in arm A and 14/55 (23%) in B (p = 0.195), while serious AEs were 22/121 (18%) and 7/55 (11%), respectively (p = 0.244). There were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation: The efficacy of sarilumab in severe COVID-19 was not demonstrated both in the overall and in the stratified for severity analysis population. Exploratory analyses suggested that subsets of patients with lower CRP values or lower lymphocyte counts might have had benefit with sarilumab treatment, but this finding would require replication in other studies. The relatively low rate of concomitant corticosteroid use, could partially explain our results. Funding: This study was supported by INMI "Lazzaro Spallanzani" Ricerca Corrente Linea 1 on emerging and reemerging infections, funded by Italian Ministry of Health.