The immunocompromised oncohematological critically ill patient: considerations in severe infections.

Sepsis and septic shock remain a major cause of mortality among critically ill patient. This is particularly relevant among cancer patients as highlighted by different series showing that up to one in five patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with sepsis have cancer, and also, sepsis is a leading reason for ICU admission in patients with cancer. The classic predictors of mortality among these patients (such as cancer lineage, neutropenia degree, or bone marrow transplantation history) have changed during the last decades, and they should no longer be used to rule out ICU admission. Instead, a newer approach to these patients should be performed taking into account organ failure assessment and prior performance status. When a doubt exists about the criteria for ICU admission, not only a trial of ICU management should be proposed to assert that no patients are withhold of the opportunity for recovering from the acute condition, but also an early admission, to prevent more derangement, and thus impact on mortality.

Current understanding in source control management in septic shock patients: a review.

Sepsis and septic shock is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Antibiotics, fluid resuscitation support of vital organ function and source control are the cornerstones for the treatment of these patients. Source control measures include all those actions taken in the process of care to control the foci of infection and to restore optimal function of the site of infection. Source control represents the multidisciplinary team required in order to optimize critical care for septic shock patients. In the last decade an increase interest on fluids, vasopressors, antibiotics, and organ support techniques in all aspects whether time, dose and type of any of those have been described. However information of source control measures involving minimal invasion and new techniques, time of action and outcome without it, is scarce. In this review the authors resumes new information, recommendations and future directions on this matter when facing the more common types of infections.

Causes of non-adherence to therapeutic guidelines in severe community-acquired pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the adherence to Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines and the causes of lack of adherence during empirical antibiotic prescription in severe pneumonia in Latin America. METHODS: A clinical questionnaire was submitted to 36 physicians from Latin America; they were asked to indicate the empirical treatment in two fictitious cases of severe respiratory infection: community-acquired pneumonia and nosocomial pneumonia. RESULTS: In the case of community acquired pneumonia, 11 prescriptions of 36 (30.6%) were compliant with international guidelines. The causes for non-compliant treatment were monotherapy (16.0%), the unnecessary prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics (40.0%) and the use of non-recommended antibiotics (44.0%). In the case of nosocomial pneumonia, the rate of adherence to the Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines was 2.8% (1 patient of 36). The reasons for lack of compliance were monotherapy (14.3%) and a lack of dual antibiotic coverage against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (85.7%). If monotherapy with an antipseudomonal antibiotic was considered adequate, the antibiotic treatment would be adequate in 100% of the total prescriptions. CONCLUSION: The compliance rate with the Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines in the community-acquired pneumonia scenario was 30.6%; the most frequent cause of lack of compliance was the indication of monotherapy. In the case of nosocomial pneumonia, the compliance rate with the guidelines was 2.8%, and the most important cause of non-adherence was lack of combined antipseudomonal therapy. If the use of monotherapy with an antipseudomonal antibiotic was considered the correct option, the treatment would be adequate in 100% of the prescriptions.

Causas de la falta de adherencia a las guías terapéuticas para la neumonía grave / Causes of non-adherence to therapeutic guidelines in severe community-acquired pneumonia

Objetivo: Valorar tasa de adherencia y causas de no adherencia a las guías terapéuticas internacionales para la prescripción antibiótica empírica en la neumonía grave en Latinoamérica. Métodos: Encuesta clínica realizada a 36 médicos de Latinoamérica donde se pedía indicar el tratamiento empírico en 2 casos clínicos ficticios de pacientes con infección respiratoria grave: neumonía adquirida en la comunidad y neumonía nosocomial. Resultados: En el caso de la neumonía comunitaria el tratamiento fue adecuado en el 30,6% de las prescripciones. Las causas de no adherencia fueron monoterapia (16,0%), cobertura no indicada para multirresistentes (4,0%) y empleo de antibióticos con espectro inadecuado (44,0%). En el caso de la neumonía nosocomial el cumplimiento de las guías terapéuticas Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society fue del 2,8%. Las causas de falta de adherencia fueron monoterapia (14,3%) y la falta de doble tratamiento antibiótico frente a Pseudomonas aeruginosa (85,7%). En caso de considerar correcta la monoterapia con actividad frente a P. aeruginosa, el tratamiento sería adecuado en el 100% de los casos. Conclusión: En la neumonía comunitaria la adherencia a las guías terapéuticas Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society fue del 30,6%; la causa más frecuente de incumplimiento fue el uso de monoterapia. La adherencia en el caso de la neumonía nosocomial fue del 2,8% y la causa más importante de incumplimiento fue la falta de doble tratamiento frente a P. aeruginosa, considerando adecuada monoterapia con actividad frente a P. aeruginosa la adherencia sería del 100%. .

Objective: To assess the adherence to Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines and the causes of lack of adherence during empirical antibiotic prescription in severe pneumonia in Latin America. Methods: A clinical questionnaire was submitted to 36 physicians from Latin America; they were asked to indicate the empirical treatment in two fictitious cases of severe respiratory infection: community-acquired pneumonia and nosocomial pneumonia. Results: In the case of communityacquired pneumonia, 11 prescriptions of 36 (30.6%) were compliant with international guidelines. The causes for non-compliant treatment were monotherapy (16.0%), the unnecessary prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics (40.0%) and the use of non-recommended antibiotics (44.0%). In the case of nosocomial pneumonia, the rate of adherence to the Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines was 2.8% (1 patient of 36). The reasons for lack of compliance were monotherapy (14.3%) and a lack of dual antibiotic coverage against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (85.7%). If monotherapy with an antipseudomonal antibiotic was considered adequate, the antibiotic treatment would be adequate in 100% of the total prescriptions. Conclusion: The compliance rate with the Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines in the community-acquired pneumonia scenario was 30.6%; the most frequent cause of lack of compliance was the indication of monotherapy. In the case of nosocomial pneumonia, the compliance rate with the guidelines was 2.8%, and the most important cause of non-adherence was lack of combined antipseudomonal therapy. If the use of monotherapy with an antipseudomonal antibiotic was considered the correct option, the treatment would be adequate in 100% of the prescriptions. .