Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Toxicol Res (Camb) ; 13(3): tfae069, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38716411

RESUMEN

Background: Toxic alcohols are chemicals with common metabolic characteristics resulting in severe morbidities and mortalities. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy of six scoring systems: The Poison Severity Score (PSS), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) in stratifying the patients exposed to toxic alcohol based on liability of organ failure, prolonged hospital stay, and need for an antidote. Methods: A seven-year retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using medical records of adult patients admitted to a poison control center. Results: About 42.6% were complicated with adverse outcomes. Methanol was the worst toxic alcohol and the only cause of blindness and death. About 27.1% of methanol-exposed patients suffered from acute kidney injury, 15.3% suffered from hemodynamic instability and neurological dysfunction, and 8.5% suffered from respiratory failure. An APACHE II score above 8 was the best predictor of unfavorable outcomes, exhibiting the highest area under the curve (0.972), followed by the SOFA score. The APACHE II score was praised for being the best discriminator of an expected prolonged hospital stay. Yet, the simple scores, including RAPS and REMS, showed good performance as unfavorable outcome predictors with no significant variations to PSS, APACHE II score, and SOFA scores. Conclusion: The current study concluded that though the APACHE II and SOFA scores were superior to others, the RAPS and REMS are good, simple, and effective alternatives, particularly when resources are restricted.

2.
PLoS One ; 15(11): e0241724, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33237924

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Sources of infection of most cases of community-acquired Legionnaires' disease (CALD) are unknown. OBJECTIVE: Identification of sources of infection of CALD. SETTING: Berlin; December 2016-May 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Adult cases of CALD reported to district health authorities and consenting to the study; age and hospital matched controls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Percentage of cases of CALD with attributed source of infection. METHODS: Analysis of secondary patient samples for monoclonal antibody (MAb) type (and sequence type); questionnaire-based interviews, analysis of standard household water samples for Legionella concentration followed by MAb (and sequence) typing of Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 (Lp1) isolates; among cases taking of additional water samples to identify the infectious source as appropriate; recruitment of control persons for comparison of exposure history and Legionella in standard household water samples. For each case an appraisal matrix was filled in to attribute any of three source types (external (non-residence) source, residential non-drinking water (RnDW) source (not directly from drinking water outlet), residential drinking water (RDW) as source) using three evidence types (microbiological results, cluster evidence, analytical-comparative evidence (using added information from controls)). RESULTS: Inclusion of 111 study cases and 202 controls. Median age of cases was 67 years (range 25-93 years), 74 (67%) were male. Among 65 patients with urine typable for MAb type we found a MAb 3/1-positive strain in all of them. Compared to controls being a case was not associated with a higher Legionella concentration in standard household water samples, however, the presence of a MAb 3/1-positive strain was significantly associated (odds ratio (OR) = 4.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7 to 11). Thus, a source was attributed by microbiological evidence if it contained a MAb 3/1-positive strain. A source was attributed by cluster evidence if at least two cases were exposed to the same source. Statistically significant general source types were attributed by calculating the population attributable risk (analytical-comparative evidence). We identified an external source in 16 (14%) cases, and RDW as source in 28 (25%). Wearing inadequately disinfected dentures was the only RnDW source significantly associated with cases (OR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 7.8) and led to an additional 8% of cases with source attribution, for a total of 48% of cases attributed. CONCLUSION: Using the appraisal matrix we attributed almost half of all cases of CALD to an infectious source, predominantly RDW. Risk for LD seems to be conferred primarily by the type of Legionella rather than the amount. Dentures as a new infectious source needs further, in particular, integrated microbiological, molecular and epidemiological confirmation.


Asunto(s)
Legionella pneumophila/aislamiento & purificación , Enfermedad de los Legionarios/diagnóstico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/inmunología , Berlin/epidemiología , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/diagnóstico , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/epidemiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/microbiología , Dentaduras/microbiología , Desinfectantes/farmacología , Agua Potable/microbiología , Femenino , Humanos , Legionella pneumophila/efectos de los fármacos , Legionella pneumophila/inmunología , Enfermedad de los Legionarios/epidemiología , Enfermedad de los Legionarios/microbiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Factores de Riesgo , Microbiología del Agua
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...