Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 3.138
Filtrar
1.
Br J Hosp Med (Lond) ; 82(3): 1-6, 2021 Mar 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33792383

RESUMEN

Antibiotics are one of the most widely used classes of drugs within hospitals in the UK. They have a wide range of uses within all surgical specialties, both as preoperative prophylaxis and for treatment of acute surgical conditions. Antimicrobial resistance has increasingly been seen as a major issue, as the production of new antibiotics has decreased and overall use worldwide has increased. With the COVID-19 pandemic increasing concerns about antimicrobial resistance, there is an ever-increasing need for action. This article examines the particular challenges of antibiotic stewardship in surgical departments within the UK, and outlines possible solutions for improving adherence and reducing the risk of antimicrobial resistance in the future.


Asunto(s)
Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/métodos , Servicio de Cirugía en Hospital , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Apendicitis/terapia , Colecistitis/terapia , Diverticulitis/terapia , Humanos , Cuidados Preoperatorios , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/tratamiento farmacológico , Reino Unido
2.
J Surg Oncol ; 123(6): 1387-1394, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831250

RESUMEN

Surgical site infection after pancreaticoduodenectomy is often caused by pathogens resistant to standard prophylactic antibiotics, suggesting that broad-spectrum antibiotics may be more effective prophylactic agents. This article describes the rationale and methodology underlying a multicenter randomized trial evaluating piperacillin-tazobactam compared with cefoxitin for surgical site infection prevention following pancreaticoduodenectomy. As the first US randomized surgical trial to utilize a clinical registry for data collection, this study serves as proof of concept for registry-based clinical trials.


Asunto(s)
Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Cefoxitina/administración & dosificación , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/efectos adversos , Combinación Piperacilina y Tazobactam/administración & dosificación , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sistema de Registros , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/etiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control
3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 3: CD008726, 2021 03 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33661539

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section increases the risk of postpartum infection for women and prophylactic antibiotics have been shown to reduce the incidence; however, there are adverse effects. It is important to identify the most effective class of antibiotics to use and those with the least adverse effects.  OBJECTIVES: To determine, from the best available evidence, the balance of benefits and harms between different classes of antibiotic given prophylactically to women undergoing caesarean section, considering their effectiveness in reducing infectious complications for women and adverse effects on both mother and infant. SEARCH METHODS: For this 2020 update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (2 December 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different classes of prophylactic antibiotics given to women undergoing caesarean section.  RCTs published in abstract form were also included. We excluded trials that compared drugs with placebo or drugs within a specific class; these are assessed in other Cochrane Reviews. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials. Cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 39 studies, with 33 providing data (8073 women). Thirty-two studies (7690 women) contributing data administered antibiotics systemically, while one study (383 women) used lavage and was analysed separately. We identified three main comparisons that addressed clinically important questions on antibiotics at caesarean section (all systemic administration), but we only found studies for one comparison, 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors'.   We found no studies for the following comparisons: 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus lincosamides' and 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus lincosamides plus aminoglycosides'. Twenty-seven studies (22 provided data) included comparisons of cephalosporins (only) versus penicillins (only). However for this update, we only pooled data relating to different sub-classes of penicillins and cephalosporins where they are known to have similar spectra of action against agents likely to cause infection at caesarean section. Eight trials, providing data on 1540 women, reported on our main comparison, 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors'. We found data on four other comparisons of cephalosporins (only) versus penicillins (only) using systemic administration: antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus non-antistaphylococcal penicillins (natural and broad spectrum) (9 studies, 3093 women); minimally antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (3rd generation) versus non-antistaphylococcal penicillins (natural and broad spectrum) (4 studies, 854 women); minimally antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (3rd generation) versus broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors (2 studies, 865 women); and minimally antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (3rd generation) versus broad spectrum and antistaphylococcal penicillins (1 study, 200 women). For other comparisons of different classes of antibiotics, only a small number of trials provided data for each comparison, and in all but one case data were not pooled. For all comparisons, there was a lack of good quality data and important outcomes often included few women. Three of the studies that contributed data were undertaken with drug company funding, one was funded by the hospital, and for all other studies the funding source was not reported. Most of the studies were at unclear risk of selection bias, reporting bias and other biases, partly due to the inclusion of many older trials where trial reports did not provide sufficient methodological information. We undertook GRADE assessment on the only main comparison reported by the included studies, antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors, and the certainty ranged from low to very low, mostly due to concerns about risk of bias, wide confidence intervals (CI), and few events. In terms of the primary outcomes for our main comparison of 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1st and 2nd generation) versus broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors': only one small study reported sepsis, and there were too few events to identify clear differences between the drugs (risk ratio (RR) 2.37, 95% CI 0.10 to 56.41, 1 study, 75 women, very low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between these antibiotics in preventing endometritis (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.60, 7 studies, 1161 women; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on infant sepsis or infant oral thrush. For our secondary outcomes, we found there may be little or no difference between interventions for maternal fever (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.75, 3 studies, 678 women; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effects on maternal: wound infection (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.90, 4 studies, 543 women), urinary tract infection (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.73, 4 studies, 496 women), composite adverse effects (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.09 to 10.50, 2 studies, 468 women), and skin rash (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.1, 3 studies, 591 women) (all very low certainty evidence). Although maternal allergic reactions were reported by two studies, there were no events. There were no infant outcomes reported in the included studies. For the other comparisons, the results for most outcomes had wide CIs, few studies and few women included. None of the included trials reported on longer-term maternal outcomes, or on any infant outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the best currently available evidence, 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins' and 'broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors' may have similar efficacy at caesarean section when considering immediate postoperative infection, although we did not have clear evidence for several important outcomes. Most trials administered antibiotics at or after cord clamping, or post-operatively, so results may have limited applicability to current practice which generally favours administration prior to skin incision. We have no data on any infant outcomes, nor on late infections (up to 30 days) in the mother; these are important gaps in the evidence that warrant further research. Antimicrobial resistance is very important but more appropriately investigated by other trial designs.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Infecciones Bacterianas/prevención & control , Cefalosporinas/uso terapéutico , Cesárea/efectos adversos , Penicilinas/uso terapéutico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/clasificación , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Cefalosporinas/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Embarazo , Infección Puerperal/prevención & control , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Inhibidores de beta-Lactamasas/uso terapéutico
4.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl ; 103(3): 186-190, 2021 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33645273

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic antibiotics are used in acellular dermal matrix-assisted implant-based breast reconstructions. However, there are no universally accepted guidelines regarding the best regimen. This retrospective, multicentre study was designed to compare the different prophylactic antibiotic regimens in these patients in three hospitals across two NHS trusts over a five-year period. METHODS: Case notes and electronic records were reviewed for all patients undergoing acellular dermal matrix-assisted implant-based breast reconstructions between January 2010 and December 2014. Prophylactic antibiotic regimens, duration of use, wound infection, implant loss, seroma and therapeutic antibiotic use was recorded. Patients were divided into groups based on prophylactic antibiotic regimen and actual duration of use. Intergroup analysis was performed using Stata 13.0. Implant loss due to infection was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients had 122 breast reconstructions performed over the study period. Four prophylactic antibiotic regimens were identified: single dose (n = 20), three doses (n = 17), antibiotics for five-seven days (n = 51) and antibiotics until drains removed (n = 32). There was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between the various regimens in implant loss, wound infection, therapeutic antibiotic prescription or seroma rates. Based on the actual duration of prophylactic antibiotics usage, three groups were identified: prophylactic antibiotics given for one day (n = 26), antibiotics for up to one week (n = 76) and for more than one week (n = 13). Again, no statistically significant difference was observed in the groups for any outcome measure. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated no difference in outcomes between different prophylactic antibiotic regimens in acellular dermal matrix-assisted implant-based breast reconstructions.


Asunto(s)
Dermis Acelular , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Implantación de Mama/métodos , Mastectomía , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/epidemiología , Trasplante de Piel/métodos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Remoción de Dispositivos , Duración de la Terapia , Femenino , Humanos , Mamoplastia/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mastectomía Profiláctica , Estudios Retrospectivos , Seroma/epidemiología
6.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(4): e24162, 2021 Jan 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33530207

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: Nosocomial infections (NI) are common complications after cardiac surgery. To date, there have been few manuscripts investigating NI in the intensive care unit after cardiac surgery. Our study was designed to investigate the characteristics of the distribution of pathogenic bacteria, antibiotic resistance and risk factors for NI.A total of 1360 patients received standard postoperative care, including antibiotic prophylaxis. Microbiological examinations of sputum, blood, catheter tips and excrement were performed as clinically indicated to isolate pathogens. Thirty potential associated variables were collected and compared between the 2 different groups according to the development of NI using univariate and multivariate analyses.Eighty-nine patients (6.54%) acquired a microbiologically documented NI. There was a significant difference in mortality between the 2 groups with or without postoperative NI (23.60% vs 2.28%, P < .00). A total of 98 pathogens (73.13%) were isolated from sputum, 32 pathogens (23.88%) from blood and only 1 (0.75%) from urine. Three (2.24%) surgical site infections were detected, including 2 superficial surgical site infections and 1 mediastinitis. The most common pathogens were Gram-negative bacteria (78.36%), followed by Gram-positive bacteria (14.93%) and fungi (6.71%). The major pathogenic species had different levels of drug resistance, and most of them exhibited multidrug resistance. Six out of thirty variables were identified as independent risk factors for the development of NI, namely, duration of surgery, low cardiac output syndrome, continuous veno-venous hemofiltration, mechanical ventilation time, reintubation and tracheostomy.We analyzed the characteristics of the distribution of pathogens, antibiotic resistance and risk factors for NI in our center and provided some suggestions for clinical practice. In addition to antibiotic treatment, avoidance of risk factors and aggressive infection control measures may be crucial to stop or prevent outbreaks.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos/estadística & datos numéricos , Infección Hospitalaria/etiología , Infección Hospitalaria/microbiología , Factores de Edad , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Índice de Masa Corporal , Creatinina/sangre , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores Sexuales , Fumar/epidemiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología
7.
BMC Surg ; 21(1): 69, 2021 Feb 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33522909

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Elective implant removal (IR) after fracture fixation is one of the most common procedures within (orthopedic) trauma surgery. The rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) in this procedure is quite high, especially below the level of the knee. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not routinely prescribed, even though it has proved to lower SSI rates in other (orthopedic) trauma surgical procedures. The primary objective is to study the effectiveness of a single intravenous dose of 2 g of cefazolin on SSIs after IR following fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. METHODS: This is a multicenter, double-blind placebo controlled trial with a superiority design, including adult patients undergoing elective implant removal after fixation of a fracture of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Exclusion criteria are: an active infection, current antibiotic treatment, or a medical condition contraindicating prophylaxis with cefazolin including allergy. Patients are randomized to receive a single preoperative intravenous dose of either 2 g of cefazolin or a placebo (NaCl). The primary analysis will be an intention-to-treat comparison of the proportion of patients with a SSI at 90 days after IR in both groups. DISCUSSION: If 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin proves to be both effective and cost-effective in preventing SSI, this would have implications for current guidelines. Combined with the high infection rate of IR which previous studies have shown, it would be sufficiently substantiated for guidelines to suggest protocolled use of prophylactic antibiotics in IR of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register (NTR): NL8284, registered on 9th of January 2020, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8284.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Huesos de la Extremidad Inferior/cirugía , Cefazolina , Remoción de Dispositivos/efectos adversos , Fracturas Óseas/cirugía , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica , Adulto , Tobillo , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Antibacterianos/economía , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/economía , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Huesos de la Extremidad Inferior/lesiones , Cefazolina/administración & dosificación , Cefazolina/economía , Cefazolina/uso terapéutico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Remoción de Dispositivos/economía , Método Doble Ciego , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/economía , Fijación Interna de Fracturas/instrumentación , Humanos , Infusiones Intravenosas , Pierna , Extremidad Inferior , Rótula , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/tratamiento farmacológico , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/economía , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/etiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control
8.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD013198, 2021 01 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33448349

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic respiratory condition characterised by persistent respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation. Acute exacerbations punctuate the natural history of COPD and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality and disease progression. Chronic airflow limitation is caused by a combination of small airways (bronchitis) and parenchymal destruction (emphysema), which can impact day-to-day activities and overall quality of life. In carefully selected patients with COPD, long-term, prophylactic use of antibiotics may reduce bacterial load, inflammation of the airways, and the frequency of exacerbations. OBJECTIVES: To assess effects of different prophylactic antibiotics on exacerbations, quality of life, and serious adverse events in people with COPD in three separate network meta-analyses (NMAs), and to provide rankings of identified antibiotics. SEARCH METHODS: To identify eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs), we searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and clinical trials registries. We conducted the most recent search on 22 January 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs with a parallel design of at least 12 weeks' duration evaluating long-term administration of antibiotics prophylactically compared with other antibiotics, or placebo, for patients with COPD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: This Cochrane Review collected and updated pair-wise data from two previous Cochrane Reviews. Searches were updated and additional studies included. We conducted three separate network meta-analyses (NMAs) within a Bayesian framework to assess three outcomes: exacerbations, quality of life, and serious adverse events. For quality of life, we collected data from St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Using previously validated methods, we selected the simplest model that could adequately fit the data for every analysis. We used threshold analysis to indicate which results were robust to potential biases, taking into account each study's contributions to the overall results and network structure. Probability ranking was performed for each antibiotic class for exacerbations, quality of life, and serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: Characteristics of studies and participants Eight trials were conducted at multiple sites that included hospital clinics or academic health centres. Seven were single-centre trials conducted in hospital clinics. Two trials did not report settings. Trials durations ranged from 12 to 52 weeks. Most participants had moderate to severe disease. Mean age ranged from 64 years to 73 years, and more males were recruited (51% to 100%). Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ranged from 0.935 to 1.36 L. Most participants had previous exacerbations. Data from 12 studies were included in the NMAs (3405 participants; 16 treatment arms including placebo). Prophylactic antibiotics evaluated were macrolides (azithromycin and erythromycin), tetracyclines (doxycyclines), quinolones (moxifloxacin) and macrolides plus tetracyclines (roxithromycin plus doxycycline). Risk of bias and threshold analysis Most studies were at low risk across domains, except detection bias, for which only seven studies were judged at low risk. In the threshold analysis for exacerbations, all comparisons in which one antibiotic was compared with another were robust to sampling variation, especially macrolide comparisons. Comparisons of classes with placebo were sensitive to potential bias, especially macrolide versus placebo, therefore, any bias in the comparison was likely to favour the active class, so any adjustment would bring the estimated relative effect closer to the null value, thus quinolone may become the best class to prevent exacerbations. Exacerbations Nine studies were included (2732 participants) in this NMA (exacerbations analysed as time to first exacerbation or people with one or more exacerbations). Macrolides and quinolones reduced exacerbations. Macrolides had a greater effect in reducing exacerbations compared with placebo (macrolides: hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.60 to 0.75; quinolones: HR 0.89, 95% CrI 0.75 to 1.04), resulting in 127 fewer people per 1000 experiencing exacerbations on macrolides. The difference in exacerbations between tetracyclines and placebo was uncertain (HR 1.29, 95% CrI 0.66 to 2.41). Macrolides ranked first (95% CrI first to second), with quinolones ranked second (95% CrI second to third). Tetracyclines ranked fourth, which was lower than placebo (ranked third). Contributing studies were considered as low risk of bias in a threshold analysis. Quality of life (SGRQ) Seven studies were included (2237 participants) in this NMA. SGRQ scores improved with macrolide treatment compared with placebo (fixed effect-fixed class effect: mean difference (MD) -2.30, 95% CrI -3.61 to -0.99), but the mean difference did not reach the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of 4 points. Tetracyclines and quinolones did not improve quality of life any more than placebo, and we did not detect a difference between antibiotic classes. Serious adverse events Nine studies were included (3180 participants) in the NMA. Macrolides reduced the odds of a serious adverse event compared with placebo (fixed effect-fixed class effect: odds ratio (OR) 0.76, 95% CrI 0.62 to 0.93). There was probably little to no difference in the effect of quinolone compared with placebo or tetracycline plus macrolide compared with placebo. There was probably little to no difference in serious adverse events between quinolones or tetracycline plus macrolide. With macrolide treatment 49 fewer people per 1000 experienced a serious adverse event compared with those given placebo. Macrolides ranked first, followed by quinolones. Tetracycline did not rank better than placebo. Drug resistance Ten studies reported drug resistance. Results were not combined due to variation in outcome measures. All studies concluded that prophylactic antibiotic administration was associated with the development of antimicrobial resistance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This NMA evaluated the safety and efficacy of different antibiotics used prophylactically for COPD patients. Compared to placebo, prolonged administration of macrolides (ranked first) appeared beneficial in prolonging the time to next exacerbation, improving quality of life, and reducing serious adverse events. No clear benefits were associated with use of quinolones or tetracyclines. In addition, antibiotic resistance was a concern and could not be thoroughly assessed in this review. Given the trade-off between effectiveness, safety, and risk of antibiotic resistance, prophylactic administration of antibiotics may be best reserved for selected patients, such as those experiencing frequent exacerbations. However, none of the eligible studies excluded patients with previously isolated non-tuberculous mycobacteria, which would contraindicate prophylactic administration of antibiotics, due to the risk of developing resistant non-tuberculous mycobacteria.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Carga Bacteriana/efectos de los fármacos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Metaanálisis en Red , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Profilaxis Antibiótica/efectos adversos , Teorema de Bayes , Sesgo , Femenino , Volumen Espiratorio Forzado , Humanos , Macrólidos/efectos adversos , Macrólidos/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/complicaciones , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/microbiología , Calidad de Vida , Quinolonas/efectos adversos , Quinolonas/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Tetraciclinas/efectos adversos , Tetraciclinas/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento
9.
Ann Hematol ; 100(3): 653-659, 2021 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33495923

RESUMEN

The primary aim of this study was to describe the use of primary anti-infective prophylaxis (AP) in common clinical practice in patients affected by immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) and treated with RTX. Population studied consisted of patients affected by ITP (age ≥ 18 years) who had received at least one dose of RTX from January 2008 to June 2018. Five Italian haematology centres participated in the current study. Data were retrospectively collected: demographic data (age, gender), concomitant comorbidities and previous therapies for ITP, characteristics of AP, the occurrence of infections and their management. The ITP cohort consisted of 67 patients sub-grouped into two categories according to the administration of AP: (1) treated with AP (N= 34; 51%) and (2) not treated with AP (N=33, 49%). AP consisted of combined trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) and acyclovir (AC) in half of patients. TPM/SMX as a single agent was adopted in 32% patients and one patient received only AC. Overall, infections were experienced in 15% of patients during follow-up with a similar proportion in the 2 groups (treated and not treated) of patients (14.7% vs 15%). Clinical course of infections was however, less severe in patients treated with AP, where all infections were grade 2 and did not require hospitalization. In neither group of patients was reported Pneumocystis pneumonia. In conclusion, despite the absence of clear evidence, our analysis shows that AP in patients with ITP receiving RTX is frequently adopted, even if in the absence of well-defined criteria. Prophylaxis administration is quite consistent within the same haematological Center; thus, it seems related to clinicians' experience.


Asunto(s)
Profilaxis Antibiótica , Infecciones Oportunistas/tratamiento farmacológico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Púrpura Trombocitopénica Idiopática/tratamiento farmacológico , Rituximab/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Profilaxis Antibiótica/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Italia/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infecciones Oportunistas/epidemiología , Infecciones Oportunistas/etiología , Púrpura Trombocitopénica Idiopática/complicaciones , Púrpura Trombocitopénica Idiopática/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto Joven
10.
PLoS One ; 16(1): e0244778, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33406138

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Populations such as healthcare workers (HCW) that are unable to practice physical distancing are at high risk of acquiring Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In these cases pharmacological prophylaxis would be a solution to reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2) transmission. Hydroxychloroquine has in vitro antiviral properties against SARS CoV-2. We therefore sought to determine the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis for COVID-19. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We electronically searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane COVID-19 Register of Controlled Trials, Epistemonikos COVID-19, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to September 28th, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effect model. We identified four RCTs (n = 4921) that met our eligibility criteria. The use of hydroxychloroquine, compared to placebo, did not reduce the risks of developing COVID-19 (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04, moderate certainty), hospitalization (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.50, moderate certainty), or mortality (RR 3.26, 95% CI 0.13 to 79.74, low certainty), however, hydroxychloroquine use increased the risk of adverse events (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.38 to 5.55, moderate certainty). CONCLUSION: Although pharmacologic prophylaxis is an attractive preventive strategy against COVID-19, the current body of evidence failed to show clinical benefit for prophylactic hydroxychloroquine and showed a higher risk of adverse events when compared to placebo or no prophylaxis.


Asunto(s)
/tratamiento farmacológico , Hidroxicloroquina/efectos adversos , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapéutico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina/metabolismo , Profilaxis Pre-Exposición/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , /patogenicidad
11.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD000022, 2021 01 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33481250

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patients treated with mechanical ventilation in intensive care units (ICUs) have a high risk of developing respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) has been estimated to affect 5% to 40% of patients treated with mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours. The attributable mortality rate of VAP has been estimated at about 9%. Selective digestive decontamination (SDD), which consists of the topical application of non-absorbable antimicrobial agents to the oropharynx and gastroenteric tract during the whole period of mechanical ventilation, is often used to reduce the risk of VAP. A related treatment is selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD), in which topical antibiotics are applied to the oropharynx only. This is an update of a review first published in 1997 and updated in 2002, 2004, and 2009. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of topical antibiotic regimens (SDD and SOD), given alone or in combination with systemic antibiotics, to prevent mortality and respiratory infections in patients receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours in ICUs. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group's Specialised Register, PubMed, and Embase on 5 February 2020. We also searched the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing and unpublished studies on 5 February 2020. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing the efficacy and safety of topical prophylactic antibiotic regimens in adults receiving intensive care and mechanical ventilation. The included studies compared topical plus systemic antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment; topical antibiotics versus no treatment; and topical plus systemic antibiotics versus systemic antibiotics. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 41 trials involving 11,004 participants (five new studies were added in this update). The minimum duration of mechanical ventilation ranged from 2 (19 studies) to 6 days (one study). Thirteen studies reported the mean length of ICU stay, ranging from 11 to 33 days. The percentage of immunocompromised patients ranged from 0% (10 studies) to 22% (1 study). The reporting quality of the majority of included studies was very poor, so we judged more than 40% of the studies as at unclear risk of selection bias. We judged all studies to be at low risk of performance bias, though 47.6% were open-label, because hospitals usually have standardised infection control programmes, and possible subjective decisions on who should be tested for the presence or absence of RTIs are unlikely in an ICU setting. Regarding detection bias, we judged all included studies as at low risk for the outcome mortality. For the outcome RTIs, we judged all double-blind studies as at low risk of detection bias. We judged five open-label studies as at high risk of detection bias, as the diagnosis of RTI was not based on microbiological exams; we judged the remaining open-label studies as at low risk of detection bias, as a standardised set of diagnostic criteria, including results of microbiological exams, were used. Topical plus systemic antibiotic prophylaxis reduces overall mortality compared with placebo or no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 0.96; 18 studies; 5290 participants; high-certainty evidence). Based on an illustrative risk of 303 deaths in 1000 people this equates to 48 (95% CI 15 to 79) fewer deaths with topical plus systemic antibiotic prophylaxis. Topical plus systemic antibiotic prophylaxis probably reduces RTIs (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.53; 17 studies; 2951 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on an illustrative risk of 417 RTIs in 1000 people this equates to 238 (95% CI 196 to 271) fewer RTIs with topical plus systemic antibiotic prophylaxis. Topical antibiotic prophylaxis probably reduces overall mortality compared with no topical antibiotic prophylaxis (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; 22 studies, 4213 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on an illustrative risk of 290 deaths in 1000 people this equates to 19 (95% CI 37 fewer to 15 more) fewer deaths with topical antibiotic prophylaxis. Topical antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce RTIs (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.74; 19 studies, 2698 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on an illustrative risk of 318 RTIs in 1000 people this equates to 137 (95% CI 83 to 178) fewer RTIs with topical antibiotic prophylaxis. Sixteen studies reported adverse events and dropouts due to adverse events, which were poorly reported with sparse data. The certainty of the evidence ranged from low to very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Treatments based on topical prophylaxis probably reduce respiratory infections, but not mortality, in adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours, whereas a combination of topical and systemic prophylactic antibiotics reduces both overall mortality and RTIs. However, we cannot rule out that the systemic component of the combined treatment provides a relevant contribution in the observed reduction of mortality. No conclusion can be drawn about adverse events as they were poorly reported with sparse data.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/prevención & control , Respiración Artificial/efectos adversos , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/prevención & control , Administración Tópica , Adulto , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Profilaxis Antibiótica/efectos adversos , Sesgo , Cuidados Críticos , Infección Hospitalaria/mortalidad , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/mortalidad
12.
Arq Bras Cir Dig ; 33(4): e1558, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés, Portugués | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33503118

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Infection of the surgical site is the common complication, with significant rates of morbidity and mortality, representing a considerable economic problem for the health system. OBJECTIVE: To carry out a narrative review of the literature on surgical site infection and the principles of antibiotic prophylaxis to update the knowledge of its use in surgery. METHOD: Medline, Ovid, Google Scholar, National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Cochrane and SciELO were used for the research. The keywords used were "anti-bacterial agents"; "antibioticoprophylaxis" AND "surgical wound infection". The inclusion criteria were articles of recent publication, with full texts available and performed in humans. RESULT: A total of 29 articles were evaluated and selected according to the eligibility criteria. CONCLUSION: Infection of the surgical site is the most common postoperative complication. The key point of its prevention is the combination of several interventions that aim to reduce risk factors, such as: compliance with the new guidelines of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention; the principles of the use of prophylactic antibiotics; factors and risk index of the surgical site; administration time; duration and dosage of antibiotics. These data are available in this article.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Infecciones Bacterianas/prevención & control , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Control de Infecciones , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/microbiología
13.
Artículo en Inglés | IBECS | ID: ibc-199912

RESUMEN

Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery is one of the most effective measures for preventing surgical site infection, although its use is frequently inadequate and may even increase the risk of infection, toxicities and bacterial resistance. As a result of advances in surgical techniques and the emergence of multidrug-resistant organisms, the current guidelines for prophylaxis need to be revised. La Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas (Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology) (SEIMC) together with the Asociación Española de Cirujanos (Spanish Association of Surgeons) (AEC) have revised and updated the recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis to adapt them to any type of surgical intervention and to current epidemiology. This document gathers together the recommendations on antimicrobial prophylaxis in the various procedures, with doses, duration, prophylaxis in special patient groups, and in epidemiological settings of multidrug resistance to facilitate standardized management and the safe, effective and rational use of antibiotics in elective surgery


La profilaxis antibiótica en cirugía es una de las medidas más eficaces para la prevención de la infección de localización quirúrgica, aunque su uso es con frecuencia inadecuado, pudiendo incrementar el riesgo de infección, toxicidades y resistencias bacterianas. Debido al avance en las técnicas quirúrgicas y la emergencia de microorganismos multirresistentes, las actuales pautas de profilaxis precisan ser revisadas. La Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas (SEIMC), conjuntamente con la Asociación Española de Cirujanos (AEC), ha revisado y actualizado las recomendaciones de profilaxis antimicrobiana para adaptarlas a cada tipo de intervención quirúrgica y a la epidemiología actual. En este documento se recogen las recomendaciones de los antimicrobianos utilizados en profilaxis en los diferentes procedimientos, las dosis, la duración, la profilaxis en huéspedes especiales, y en situación epidemiológica de multirresistencia, de tal forma que permitan un manejo estandarizado, un uso racional, seguro y efectivo de los mismos en la cirugía electiva


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Conferencias de Consenso como Asunto , Sociedades Médicas/organización & administración , Profilaxis Antibiótica/normas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Operativos/normas , Sociedades Médicas/normas , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Control de Infecciones/organización & administración
14.
J Surg Res ; 257: 135-141, 2021 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32828996

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been associated with improved patient outcomes. We aimed to evaluate institutional CPG adherence and hypothesized that adherence would be associated with fewer complications in pediatric appendicitis. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of pediatric (<18 y) appendicitis patients who underwent appendectomy (6/1/2017-5/30/2018). Patients were managed using an institutional pediatric appendicitis CPG. The primary outcome was CPG adherence, defined as receipt of preoperative antibiotics at diagnosis, surgical prophylaxis before incision, and, in perforated/gangrenous appendicitis, continued postoperative antibiotics, and prescription for discharge antibiotics. Univariate and multivariate analyzes were performed. RESULTS: Among 399 patients, the baseline characteristics were similar between CPG-adherent and nonadherent patients. Overall CPG adherence was low at 55% (n = 221). Only 58% of patients received preoperative antibiotics per protocol (n = 233). Patients with simple appendicitis were more likely to proceed to surgery without receiving any preoperative antibiotics (35% vs. 21%, P = 0.004). Surgical prophylaxis compliance was high at 97% (n = 389). CPG violation was associated with reoperation (n = 5 versus 0, P = 0.02). After adjusting for age and admission white blood cell count, the association between CPG adherence and postoperative surgical site infection or intra-abdominal abscess remained nonsignificant (OR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.5-2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a long-standing pediatric appendicitis CPG, adherence with antibiotic components of the CPG was poor. CPG violation was significantly associated with reoperation, but was not associated with other postoperative complications. Regular audits of CPG adherence are necessary to ascertain reasons for noncompliance and identify ways to improve adherence.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Apendicectomía/efectos adversos , Apendicitis/cirugía , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Apendicectomía/métodos , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Recuento de Leucocitos , Masculino , Alta del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuidados Posoperatorios/métodos , Cuidados Preoperatorios/métodos , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos
15.
Clín. investig. ginecol. obstet. (Ed. impr.) ; 47(4): 136-142, oct.-dic. 2020. tab, graf
Artículo en Español | IBECS | ID: ibc-197640

RESUMEN

OBJETIVO: Calcular la tasa de conversión y describir las indicaciones, tipos de cirugía y complicaciones de las histerectomías laparoscópicas en un hospital comarcal. Analizar los tiempos quirúrgicos y el peso uterino. MÉTODO: Estudio retrospectivo y descriptivo de la base de datos quirúrgica de las mujeres atendidas en el Servicio de Ginecología y Obstetricia del Hospital Comarcal de Valdeorras (Orense). Programamos a 78 mujeres para histerectomía laparoscópica desde mayo del 2011 hasta febrero de 2018. Describimos las características demográficas, clínica, tipo de cirugía y tratamientos previos. Realizamos 62 histerectomías totales, 15 subtotales y una operación de Manchester. Calculamos la tasa de conversión, porcentaje de morcelación, tiempo quirúrgico, complicaciones (clasificadas según la escala de Clavien-Dindo y el Comprehensive Complication Index) y los resultados de anatomía patológica. RESULTADOS: Nuestra tasa de conversión fue del 5,13%. El porcentaje de morcelación fue 35,90%. En las histerectomías totales calculamos un peso uterino teórico (190 g o más) a partir del cual la morcelación sería más probable. No hubo transfusiones. Encontramos mayor tiempo quirúrgico entre los cirujanos junior, pero no más complicaciones. Las complicaciones según Clavien-Dindo fueron: 10 pacientes grado I, 10 grado II, uno grado IIIa y 4 grado IIIb. Según el Comprehensive Complication Index, 20 pacientes obtuvieron una puntuación baja (<30 puntos) y 4 pacientes entre 31 y 40 puntos. La cesárea previa estaba asociada a mayor riesgo de lesión vesical. La estancia media fue de 2,48 días. No hubo resultados de malignidad entre los úteros morcelados. CONCLUSIONES: La histerectomía laparoscópica es una técnica quirúrgica fácilmente reproducible en hospitales comarcales, con baja tasa de conversión y escasas complicaciones


OBJECTIVE: To calculate the conversion rate and describe indications, type of surgery, and complications of laparoscopic hysterectomies in a district hospital, as well as to analyse surgical time and uterine weight. METHODS: A descriptive and retrospective study was carried using the database of the Surgical Record of Gynaecology (Canadian Task Force classification III). It was conducted in the Gynaecology and Obstetrics Department of Valdeorras District Hospital (Orense, Spain). The study included 78 women scheduled for laparoscopic hysterectomy from May 2011 to February 2018. A description is presented of the demographic characteristics, symptoms, type of surgery, and previous medical treatments. A total of 62 total and 15 subtotal hysterectomies, were performed, as well as one Manchester surgery. A calculation was made of the rate of conversion, morcellation percentage, operating time, complications (classified according to the Clavien-Dindo scale and the Comprehensive Complication Index), and pathology results. RESULTS: The conversion rate was 5.13%, and the morcellation percentage was 35.90%. A theoretical cut-off was calculated of a uterus weight of 190 grammes or more for being morcellated among total hysterectomies. There were no transfusions. There were longer operating times with junior surgeons, but no difference in surgical complications compared to senior surgeons. Complications according to the Clavien-Dindo scale: 10 patients grade I, 10 grade II, one grade IIIa, and 4 grade IIIb. Using the CCI, 20 patients attained a low score (<30 points), and 4 patients scored 31-40 points. A history of caesarean section was associated with a higher risk of bladder injury. Mean days to discharge was 2.48 days. There were no malignant samples among the morcellated uteruses. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic hysterectomy is a technique that can be performed in a district hospital and in most cases with a minimum conversion rate and few complications


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Histerectomía/métodos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Histerectomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Tempo Operativo , Útero/fisiología , España/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos
16.
Trials ; 21(1): 867, 2020 Oct 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33081817

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for treatments that can shorten hospitalization and lower the risk of secondary infection and death in patients with corona disease. The ProPac-COVID trial evaluates whether combination therapy with macrolide azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine via anti-inflammation/immune modulation, antiviral efficacy, and pre-emptive treatment of supra-infections can shorten hospitalization duration and reduce the risk of non-invasive ventilation, treatment in the intensive care unit, and death in patients with acute hospital admission and a positive test for 2019-nCoV and symptoms of COVID-19 disease. METHODS: The ProPAC-COVID is a multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial. The primary outcome is number of days spent alive and out of hospital within 14 days from randomization. Randomization will be in blocks of unknown size, and the final allocation will be stratified for age, site of recruitment, and whether the patient has any chronic lung diseases. Data is analyzed using intention-to-treat (ITT) principles, and main analyses will also be subject to modified ITT analysis and per protocol analysis. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the detailed statistical analysis plan for the evaluation of primary and secondary endpoints of the ProPAC-COVID study. Enrolment of patients to the ProPAC-COVID study is still ongoing. The purpose of this paper is to provide primary publication of study results to prevent selective reporting of outcomes, data-driven analysis, and to increase transparency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04322396 . Registered on 26 March 2020.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Azitromicina/uso terapéutico , Betacoronavirus/efectos de los fármacos , Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapéutico , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Anciano , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Antimaláricos/efectos adversos , Azitromicina/efectos adversos , Betacoronavirus/genética , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/transmisión , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Dinamarca/epidemiología , Método Doble Ciego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina/efectos adversos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar/métodos , Masculino , Ventilación no Invasiva/efectos adversos , Placebos/administración & dosificación , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/transmisión , Neumonía Viral/virología , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo
17.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0239470, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32986728

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP) is an infection in patients with cirrhosis and carries significant mortality. The management of SBP is evolving with the rise of multidrug resistant organisms. Our aim was to perform a retrospective analysis to determine if identification of bacteria in culture could aid in prognosis and provide information regarding optimal treatment. METHODS: We analyzed our 10-year experience of SBP in a single academic center (Northwestern Memorial Hospital). We obtained information regarding SBP prophylaxis, culture data and resistance patterns of bacteria, choice/duration of inpatient antibiotics, and key laboratory measurements and determined outcomes including mortality, hospital duration, and ICU stay. RESULTS: Patients with SBP had a 17.8% mortality and had culture positive SBP 34.4% of the time. Antimicrobial resistance was seen in 21.3% of cases and trended towards worsening mortality, with worsened mortality associated with first line use of piperacillin-tazobactam (p = 0.0001). Patients on SBP prophylaxis who developed SBP had improved mortality (p<0.0001) unless there was a positive culture, in which case patients had worsened mortality (p = 0.019). Patient with a higher PMN counts after repeat paracentesis had higher mortality (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that SBP continues to be a morbid and deadly condition and identification of an organism is key in treatment. The standard initial antibiotic for SBP may need to be modified to reflect emerging resistant pathogens and gram-positive organisms. Further, antibiotic prophylaxis should be utilized only in select cases to prevent development of resistance.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Bacterianas/microbiología , Cirrosis Hepática/microbiología , Peritonitis/microbiología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Infecciones Bacterianas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infección Hospitalaria/microbiología , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana/efectos de los fármacos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Paracentesis/métodos , Peritonitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios Retrospectivos
18.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg ; 28(18): e793-e802, 2020 Sep 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32898359

RESUMEN

Projections indicate an increase in primary and revision total joint arthroplasties (TJAs). Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are one of the most common and devastating causes of failure after TJA. Perioperative administration of systemic and/or local antibiotics is used for both prophylaxis and treatment of PJI. Antibiotic stewardship is a term that has been met with clinical acceptance and success in other specialties of medicine. Identifying antibiotic best practice use in the fight against PJI is limited by studies that are extremely heterogeneous in their design. Variations in studies include antibiotic selection and duration, surgical débridement steps, type of antibiotic delivery (intra-articular, local, intravenous, and prolonged oral), mix of primary and revision surgery cohorts, both hip and knee cohorts, infecting organisms, and definitions of treatment success/failure. This review highlights the current challenges of antibiotic stewardship in TJA.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/métodos , Artroplastia de Reemplazo/efectos adversos , Falla de Prótesis , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/prevención & control , Humanos , Falla de Prótesis/etiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/etiología
19.
Obstet Gynecol ; 136(4): 756-764, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32925625

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and cord blood penicillin concentrations in women with and without obesity who are receiving intrapartum group B streptococcus (GBS) prophylaxis. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of term women receiving intrapartum penicillin prophylaxis for GBS colonization (determined by antenatal rectovaginal culture). The following outcomes were compared between obese (body mass index [BMI] 35 or higher at delivery) and nonobese (BMI less than 30 at delivery) groups: penicillin concentration in maternal blood (after two penicillin doses) and umbilical cord blood, GBS rectovaginal colonization status on admission and after two completed doses, and neonatal GBS colonization (using a postnatal ear swab). Fifty-five women were needed to detect a 0.75 SD difference in cord blood penicillin concentrations. RESULTS: Fifty-five women were enrolled and had all specimens collected; 49 had complete data for analysis (obese n=25, nonobese n=24). There was no difference in the median maternal penicillin concentration between groups (obese 4.2 micrograms/mL vs nonobese 4.0 micrograms/mL, P=.58). There was, however, a 60% lower median cord blood penicillin concentration in the obese compared with the nonobese group (2.7 micrograms/mL vs 6.7 micrograms/mL, respectively, P<.01), with no significant difference in time from last penicillin dose to delivery (obese 2.9 hours vs nonobese 1.7 hours, P=.07). The difference in cord blood concentrations remained significant after adjustment for nulliparity, hypertensive disorders, and time from last penicillin dose to delivery. Only 59.6% of women tested positive for GBS by rectovaginal culture on admission (obese 60.9% vs nonobese 58.3%, P=.86). CONCLUSION: The median cord blood penicillin concentration was 60% lower in neonates born to women with obesity compared with those born to women without obesity. However, all concentrations exceeded the minimum inhibitory concentration. Maternal penicillin levels were not significantly different between groups. More than 40% of women who previously tested positive for GBS by antenatal culture tested negative for GBS on admission for delivery.


Asunto(s)
Sangre Fetal/química , Tamizaje Neonatal/métodos , Obesidad , Penicilinas , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo , Infecciones Estreptocócicas , Streptococcus agalactiae/aislamiento & purificación , Adulto , Antibacterianos/sangre , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Índice de Masa Corporal , Monitoreo de Drogas/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Obesidad/sangre , Obesidad/complicaciones , Obesidad/diagnóstico , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Penicilinas/sangre , Penicilinas/uso terapéutico , Embarazo , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/sangre , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/tratamiento farmacológico , Recto/microbiología , Infecciones Estreptocócicas/sangre , Infecciones Estreptocócicas/complicaciones , Infecciones Estreptocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Vagina/microbiología
20.
Rev. cuba. invest. bioméd ; 39(3): e676, jul.-set. 2020. graf
Artículo en Español | LILACS, CUMED | ID: biblio-1138938

RESUMEN

Introducción: La profilaxis antibiótica es controvertida, además que su uso inapropiado expone a los pacientes en riesgo de reacciones adversas y desarrollo de resistencia bacteriana. Objetivo: Realizar una revisión sistemática de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados que evaluaron le eficacia de la profilaxis antibiótica en la reducción de infecciones posoperatorias luego de la extracción de terceros molares impactados. Métodos: Fueron utilizadas las bases de datos ScienceDirect, Clinical trials.gov y Scopus para ubicar ensayos clínicos. Las variables primarias incluyeron: presencia de infecciones posoperatorias (de la herida y/o alveolitis), reacciones adversas, trismo y dolor. Se realizó un metaanálisis con los estudios homogéneos a través del análisis de efectos aleatorios. El riesgo de sesgo de los ensayos incluidos fue evaluado a través de la guía Cochrane. El riesgo relativo global fue calculado utilizando el enfoque del inverso de la varianza con el método de efectos aleatorios. Resultados: Fueron analizados cualitativamente 14 ensayos clínicos y 9 cuantitativamente. De un total de 874 pacientes, 49 (5,6 por ciento) presentaron infecciones posoperatorias (16/446 para el grupo experimental y 33/428 para el grupo placebo). El metaanálisis arrojó un riesgo relativo global de 0,5 (IC 95 por ciento: 0,27-0,94). El riesgo de sesgo para los estudios que utilizaron solo amoxicilina como medida profiláctica fue de 0,53 (IC 95 por ciento: 0,27-1,03). Las principales reacciones adversas incluyeron: diarreas, reacciones gastrointestinales, fiebre y dolor gástrico. Conclusiones: Los antibióticos sistémicos administrados antes de la cirugía fueron eficaces para reducir las frecuencias de aparición de infecciones posoperatorias luego de la extracción de terceros molares impactados(AU)


Introduction: Antibiotic prophylaxis is controversial, and its inappropriate use exposes patients to the risk of adverse reactions and the development of bacterial resistance. Objective: Carry out a systematic review of randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for the reduction of postoperative infections after extraction of impacted third molars. Methods: The search for clinical trials was conducted in the databases ScienceDirect, Clinicaltrials.gov and Scopus. The primary variables considered were presence of postoperative infections (of the wound and/or alveolitis), adverse reactions, trismus and pain. A meta-analysis was made of homogeneous studies applying the random effects model. The risk of bias in the trials included was evaluated using the Cochrane guide. The inverse variance approach and the random effects method were used for estimation of the global relative risk. Results: Fourteen clinical trials were analyzed qualitatively and 9 quantitatively. Of the total 874 patients, 49 (5.6 percent:) developed postoperative infections (16 / 446 for the experimental group and 33 / 428 for the placebo group). The meta-analysis found a global relative risk of 0,5 (CI 95 percent: 0,27-0,94). Bias risk for studies using only amoxicillin as a prophylactic measure was 0,53 (CI 95 percent:: 0,27-1,03). The main adverse reactions were diarrhea, gastrointestinal reactions, fever and abdominal pain. Conclusions: The systemic antibiotics administered before the surgery were effective to reduce the frequency of appearance of postoperative infections after extraction of impacted third molars(AU)


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Tercer Molar/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Orales/métodos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...