Outcomes of octogenarians and nonagenarians with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: P. aeruginosa bacteremia is a common and severe infection carrying high mortality in older adults. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of P. aeruginosa bacteremia among old adults (≥ 80 years). METHODS: We included the 464/2394 (19%) older adults from a retrospective multinational (9 countries, 25 centers) cohort study of individuals hospitalized with P. aeruginosa bacteremia. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate risk factors for 30-day mortality among older adults. RESULTS: Among 464 adults aged ≥ 80 years, the mean age was 84.61 (SD 3.98) years, and 274 (59%) were men. Compared to younger patients, ≥ 80 years adults had lower Charlson score; were less likely to have nosocomial acquisition; and more likely to have urinary source. Thirty-day mortality was 30%, versus 27% among patients 65-79 years (n = 894) and 25% among patients < 65 years (n = 1036). Multivariate analysis for predictors of mortality among patients ≥ 80 years, demonstrated higher SOFA score (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-1.51, p < 0.001), corticosteroid therapy (OR 3.15, 95% CI: 1.24-8.01, p = 0.016) and hospital acquired P. aeruginosa bacteremia (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.33-3.98, p = 0.003) as predictors. Appropriate empirical therapy within 24 h, type of definitive anti-pseudomonal drug, and type of regimen (monotherapy or combination) were not associated with 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults with P. aeruginosa bacteremia, background conditions, place of acquisition, and disease severity are associated with mortality, rather than the antimicrobial regimen. In this regard, preventive efforts and early diagnosis before organ failure develops might be beneficial for improving outcomes.

Duration of Treatment for Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremia: a Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: There is no consensus regarding optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. We aimed to evaluate the impact of short antibiotic course. METHODS: We present a retrospective multicenter study including patients with P. aeruginosa bacteremia during 2009-2015. We evaluated outcomes of patients treated with short (6-10 days) versus long (11-15 days) antibiotic courses. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day mortality or bacteremia recurrence and/or persistence. Univariate and inverse probability treatment-weighted (IPTW) adjusted multivariate analysis for the primary outcome was performed. To avoid immortal time bias, the landmark method was used. RESULTS: We included 657 patients; 273 received a short antibiotic course and 384 a long course. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics of patients. The composite primary outcome occurred in 61/384 patients in the long-treatment group (16%) versus 32/273 in the short-treatment group (12%) (p = 0.131). Mortality accounted for 41/384 (11%) versus 25/273 (9%) of cases, respectively. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the short group [median 13 days, interquartile range (IQR) 9-21 days, versus median 15 days, IQR 11-26 days, p = 0.002]. Ten patients in the long group discontinued antibiotic therapy owing to adverse events, compared with none in the short group. On univariate and multivariate analyses, duration of therapy was not associated with the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, 6-10 days of antibiotic course for P. aeruginosa bacteremia were as effective as longer courses in terms of survival and recurrence. Shorter therapy was associated with reduced length of stay and less drug discontinuation.

It is time to define an organizational model for the prevention and management of infections along the surgical pathway: a worldwide cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of the study were to investigate the organizational characteristics of acute care facilities worldwide in preventing and managing infections in surgery; assess participants' perception regarding infection prevention and control (IPC) measures, antibiotic prescribing practices, and source control; describe awareness about the global burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and IPC measures; and determine the role of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic on said awareness. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted contacting 1432 health care workers (HCWs) belonging to a mailing list provided by the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery. The self-administered questionnaire was developed by a multidisciplinary team. The survey was open from May 22, 2021, and June 22, 2021. Three reminders were sent, after 7, 14, and 21 days. RESULTS: Three hundred four respondents from 72 countries returned a questionnaire, with an overall response rate of 21.2%. Respectively, 90.4% and 68.8% of participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary IPC team or a multidisciplinary antimicrobial stewardship team. Local protocols for antimicrobial therapy of surgical infections and protocols for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis were present in 76.6% and 90.8% of hospitals, respectively. In 23.4% and 24.0% of hospitals no surveillance systems for surgical site infections and no monitoring systems of used antimicrobials were implemented. Patient and family involvement in IPC management was considered to be slightly or not important in their hospital by the majority of respondents (65.1%). Awareness of the global burden of AMR among HCWs was considered very important or important by 54.6% of participants. The COVID-19 pandemic was considered by 80.3% of respondents as a very important or important factor in raising HCWs awareness of the IPC programs in their hospital. Based on the survey results, the authors developed 15 statements for several questions regarding the prevention and management of infections in surgery. The statements may be the starting point for designing future evidence-based recommendations. CONCLUSION: Adequacy of prevention and management of infections in acute care facilities depends on HCWs behaviours and on the organizational characteristics of acute health care facilities to support best practices and promote behavioural change. Patient involvement in the implementation of IPC is still little considered. A debate on how operationalising a fundamental change to IPC, from being solely the HCWs responsibility to one that involves a collaborative relationship between HCWs and patients, should be opened.

Understanding the Interplay between Antimicrobial Resistance, Microplastics and Xenobiotic Contaminants: A Leap towards One Health?

According to the World Health Organization, the two major public health threats in the twenty-first century are antibiotic-resistant bacteria and antibiotic-resistant genes. The reason for the global prevalence and the constant increase of antibiotic-resistant bacteria is owed to the steady rise in overall antimicrobial consumption in several medical, domestic, agricultural, industrial, and veterinary applications, with consequent environmental release. These antibiotic residues may directly contaminate terrestrial and aquatic environments in which antibiotic-resistance genes are also present. Reports suggest that metal contamination is one of the main drivers of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Moreover, the abundance of antibiotic-resistance genes is directly connected to the predominance of metal concentrations in the environment. In addition, microplastics have become a threat as emerging contaminants because of their ubiquitous presence, bio-inertness, toughness, danger to aquatic life, and human health implications. In the environment, microplastics and AMR are interconnected through biofilms, where genetic information (e.g., ARGs) is horizontally transferred between bacteria. From this perspective, we tried to summarize what is currently known on this topic and to propose a more effective One Health policy to tackle these threats.

Combination versus monotherapy as definitive treatment for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia: a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia is a common and serious infection. No consensus exists regarding whether definitive combination therapy is superior to monotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the impact of combination therapy on mortality. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective study (nine countries, 25 centres), including 1277 patients with P. aeruginosa bacteraemia during 2009-15. We evaluated the association between ß-lactam plus aminoglycoside or quinolone combination therapy versus ß-lactam monotherapy and mortality. The primary outcome was 30 day all-cause mortality. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted, introducing combination as a time-dependent variable. Propensity score was conducted to adjust for confounding for choosing combination therapy over monotherapy. RESULTS: Of 1119 patients included, 843 received definitive monotherapy and 276 received combination therapy (59% aminoglycoside and 41% quinolone). Mortality at 30 days was 16.9% (189/1119) and was similar between combination (45/276; 16.3%) and monotherapy (144/843; 17.1%) groups (P = 0.765). In multivariate Cox regression, combination therapy was not associated with reduced mortality (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.64-1.53). No advantage in terms of clinical failure, microbiological failure or recurrent/persistent bacteraemia was demonstrated using combination therapy. Likewise, adverse events and resistance development were similar for the two regimens. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort, no mortality advantage was demonstrated using combination therapy over monotherapy for P. aeruginosa bacteraemia. Combination therapy did not improve clinical or microbiological failure rates, nor affect adverse events or resistance development. Our finding of no benefit with combination therapy needs confirmation in well-designed randomized controlled trials.

The management of surgical patients in the emergency setting during COVID-19 pandemic: the WSES position paper.

BACKGROUND: Since the COVID-19 pandemic has occurred, nations showed their unpreparedness to deal with a mass casualty incident of this proportion and severity, which resulted in a tremendous number of deaths even among healthcare workers. The World Society of Emergency Surgery conceived this position paper with the purpose of providing evidence-based recommendations for the management of emergency surgical patients under COVID-19 pandemic for the safety of the patient and healthcare workers. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) through the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and SCOPUS databases. Synthesis of evidence, statements and recommendations were developed in accordance with the GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Given the limitation of the evidence, the current document represents an effort to join selected high-quality articles and experts' opinion. CONCLUSIONS: The aim of this position paper is to provide an exhaustive guidelines to perform emergency surgery in a safe and protected environment for surgical patients and for healthcare workers under COVID-19 and to offer the best management of COVID-19 patients needing for an emergency surgical treatment. We recommend screening for COVID-19 infection at the emergency department all acute surgical patients who are waiting for hospital admission and urgent surgery. The screening work-up provides a RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab test and a baseline (non-contrast) chest CT or a chest X-ray or a lungs US, depending on skills and availability. If the COVID-19 screening is not completed we recommend keeping the patient in isolation until RT-PCR swab test result is not available, and to manage him/she such as an overt COVID patient. The management of COVID-19 surgical patients is multidisciplinary. If an immediate surgical procedure is mandatory, whether laparoscopic or via open approach, we recommend doing every effort to protect the operating room staff for the safety of the patient.

The management of surgical patients in the emergency setting during COVID-19 pandemic: the WSES position paper

Since the COVID-19 pandemic has occurred, nations showed their unpreparedness to deal with a mass casualty incident of this proportion and severity, which resulted in a tremendous number of deaths even among healthcare workers. The World Society of Emergency Surgery conceived this position paper with the purpose of providing evidence-based recommendations for the management of emergency surgical patients under COVID-19 pandemic for the safety of the patient and healthcare workers. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) through the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and SCOPUS databases. Synthesis of evidence, statements and recommendations were developed in accordance with the GRADE methodology. Given the limitation of the evidence, the current document represents an effort to join selected high-quality articles and experts' opinion. The aim of this position paper is to provide an exhaustive guidelines to perform emergency surgery in a safe and protected environment for surgical patients and for healthcare workers under COVID-19 and to offer the best management of COVID-19 patients needing for an emergency surgical treatment. We recommend screening for COVID-19 infection at the emergency department all acute surgical patients who are waiting for hospital admission and urgent surgery. The screening work-up provides a RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab test and a baseline (non-contrast) chest CT or a chest X-ray or a lungs US, depending on skills and availability. If the COVID-19 screening is not completed we recommend keeping the patient in isolation until RT-PCR swab test result is not available, and to manage him/she such as an overt COVID patient. The management of COVID-19 surgical patients is multidisciplinary. If an immediate surgical procedure is mandatory, whether laparoscopic or via open approach, we recommend doing every effort to protect the operating room staff for the safety of the patient.

Lung Ultrasound in the Emergency Department for Early Identification of COVID-19 Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic overwhelming the health care systems worldwide. Lung ultrasound (LUS) use has been proposed to identify suspected COVID-19 patients and direct them to the isolation area in the emergency department (ED) or to discharge them for outpatient treatment. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to retrospectively investigate the use of LUS in the ED to identify COVID-19 pneumonia (CP). METHODS: We performed a retrospective single-center study including all patients accessing the ED who underwent LUS examination for suspicion of COVID-19 during the initial outbreak. Demographics, clinical parameters, laboratory values, imaging features, and outcome variables were collected. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: A total of 41% patients were COVID-19-positive; 67% of them were diagnosed with CP. The ROC curve of the LUS score showed an area under the curve of 0.837 (95% CI 0.75-0.92) and with a cutoff value ≥3 identified 28 of 31 patients with CP and 11 of 15 without (sensitivity 90%, 95% CI 74-97%; specificity 75%, 95% CI 56-76%). LUS in combination with nasopharyngeal swab has a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 74-97%) and a specificity of 61% (95% CI 44-67%). CONCLUSIONS: LUS is a promising technique for early identification of CP in patients who accessed the ED in an active epidemic time. The LUS score shows a sensitivity of 90% for CP, allowing to quickly direct patients with COVID-19 to the ED isolation area or to discharge them for outpatient treatment.

Antibiotic Use in Low and Middle-Income Countries and the Challenges of Antimicrobial Resistance in Surgery.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a phenomenon resulting from the natural evolution of microbes. Nonetheless, human activities accelerate the pace at which microorganisms develop and spread resistance. AMR is a complex and multidimensional problem, threatening not only human and animal health, but also regional, national, and global security, and the economy. Inappropriate use of antibiotics, and poor infection prevention and control strategies are contributing to the emergence and dissemination of AMR. All healthcare providers play an important role in preventing the occurrence and spread of AMR. The organization of healthcare systems, availability of diagnostic testing and appropriate antibiotics, infection prevention and control practices, along with prescribing practices (such as over-the-counter availability of antibiotics) differs markedly between high-income countries and low and middle-income countries (LMICs). These differences may affect the implementation of antibiotic prescribing practices in these settings. The strategy to reduce the global burden of AMR includes, among other aspects, an in-depth modification of the use of existing and future antibiotics in all aspects of medical practice. The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery has instituted an interdisciplinary working group including healthcare professionals from different countries with different backgrounds to assess the need for implementing education and increasing awareness about correct antibiotic prescribing practices across the surgical pathways. This article discusses aspects specific to LMICs, where pre-existing factors make surgeons' compliance with best practices even more important.

Country Income Is Only One of the Tiles: The Global Journey of Antimicrobial Resistance among Humans, Animals, and Environment.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the most complex global health challenges today: decades of overuse and misuse in human medicine, animal health, agriculture, and dispersion into the environment have produced the dire consequence of infections to become progressively untreatable. Infection control and prevention (IPC) procedures, the reduction of overuse, and the misuse of antimicrobials in human and veterinary medicine are the cornerstones required to prevent the spreading of resistant bacteria. Purified drinking water and strongly improved sanitation even in remote areas would prevent the pollution from inadequate treatment of industrial, residential, and farm waste, as all these situations are expanding the resistome in the environment. The One Health concept addresses the interconnected relationships between human, animal, and environmental health as a whole: several countries and international agencies have now included a One Health Approach within their action plans to address AMR. Improved antimicrobial usage, coupled with regulation and policy, as well as integrated surveillance, infection control and prevention, along with antimicrobial stewardship, sanitation, and animal husbandry should all be integrated parts of any new action plan targeted to tackle AMR on the Earth. Since AMR is found in bacteria from humans, animals, and in the environment, we briefly summarize herein the current concepts of One Health as a global challenge to enable the continued use of antibiotics.

Recommendations for the surveillance of multidrug-resistant bacteria in Italian long-term care facilities by the GLISTer working group of the Italian Association of Clinical Microbiologists (AMCLI).

Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are an important reservoir of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Colonization of LTCF residents by MDROs is generally higher in Italy compared to other European countries. The present review by the working group for the study of infections in LTCFs (GLISTer) of the Italian Association of Clinical Microbiologists (AMCLI) aims to propose criteria for a laboratory-based surveillance of MDROs in Italian LTCFs.We recommend the adhesion to three levels of laboratory-based MDROs surveillance in LTCFs: i) mandatory MDRO surveillance by cumulative retrospective analysis of antimicrobial susceptibility data, obtained as part of routine care of clinical specimens. ii) strongly recommended surveillance by active rectal swab cultures or molecular screening to determine colonization with carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales, should a resident be proven infected. iii) voluntary surveillance by prospective MDRO surveys, mainly based on point prevalence colonization studies, allowing to determine the MDROs baseline prevalence in the facility.Laboratory-based surveillance of MDROs in LTCFs is aimed at providing useful epidemiological information to healthcare providers operating in the facility, but it is only effective if the collected data are used for infection prevention and control purposes, targeting the peculiar aspects of LTCFs.

2020 update of the WSES guidelines for the management of acute colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting.

Acute colonic diverticulitis is one of the most common clinical conditions encountered by surgeons in the acute setting. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis (ALCD) according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of ALCD. The new update has been further integrated with advances in acute right-sided colonic diverticulitis (ARCD) that is more common than ALCD in select regions of the world.

A proposal for a comprehensive approach to infections across the surgical pathway.

Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of best practices in infection prevention and management, many healthcare workers fail to implement them and evidence-based practices tend to be underused in routine practice. Prevention and management of infections across the surgical pathway should always focus on collaboration among all healthcare workers sharing knowledge of best practices. To clarify key issues in the prevention and management of infections across the surgical pathway, a multidisciplinary task force of experts convened in Ancona, Italy, on May 31, 2019, for a national meeting. This document represents the executive summary of the final statements approved by the expert panel.

Ceftazidime, Carbapenems, or Piperacillin-tazobactam as Single Definitive Therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bloodstream Infection: A Multisite Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antibiotic regimen for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia is controversial. Although ß-lactam monotherapy is common, data to guide the choice between antibiotics are scarce. We aimed to compare ceftazidime, carbapenems, and piperacillin-tazobactam as definitive monotherapy. METHODS: A multinational retrospective study (9 countries, 25 centers) including 767 hospitalized patients with P. aeruginosa bacteremia treated with ß-lactam monotherapy during 2009-2015. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Univariate and multivariate, including propensity-adjusted, analyses were conducted introducing monotherapy type as an independent variable. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was 37/213 (17.4%), 42/210 (20%), and 55/344 (16%) in the ceftazidime, carbapenem, and piperacillin-tazobactam groups, respectively. Type of monotherapy was not significantly associated with mortality in either univariate, multivariate, or propensity-adjusted analyses (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-2.46, for ceftazidime; OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.67-2.51, for piperacillin-tazobactam, with carbapenems as reference in propensity adjusted multivariate analysis; 542 patients). No significant difference between antibiotics was demonstrated for clinical failure, microbiological failure, or adverse events. Isolation of P. aeruginosa with new resistance to antipseudomonal drugs was significantly more frequent with carbapenems (36/206 [17.5%]) versus ceftazidime (25/201 [12.4%]) and piperacillin-tazobactam (28/332 [8.4%] (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in mortality, clinical, and microbiological outcomes or adverse events was demonstrated between ceftazidime, carbapenems, and piperacillin-tazobactam as definitive treatment of P. aeruginosa bacteremia. Higher rates of resistant P. aeruginosa after patients were treated with carbapenems, along with the general preference for carbapenem-sparing regimens, suggests using ceftazidime or piperacillin-tazobactam for treating susceptible infection.

Risk factors for mortality among patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia: a retrospective multicentre study.

This study aimed to evaluate risk factors for 30-day mortality among hospitalised patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia, a highly fatal condition. A retrospective study was conducted between 1 January 2009 and 31 October 2015 in 25 centres (9 countries) including 2396 patients. Univariable and multivariable analyses of risk factors were conducted for the entire cohort and for patients surviving ≥48 h. A propensity score for predictors of appropriate empirical therapy was introduced into the analysis. Of the 2396 patients, 636 (26.5%) died within 30 days. Significant predictors (odds ratio and 95% confidence interval) of mortality in the multivariable analysis included patient-related factors: age (1.02, 1.01-1.03); female sex (1.34, 1.03-1.77); bedridden functional capacity (1.99, 1.24-3.21); recent hospitalisation (1.43, 1.07-1.92); concomitant corticosteroids (1.33, 1.02-1.73); and Charlson comorbidity index (1.05, 1.01-1.93). Infection-related factors were multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas (1.52, 1.15-2.1), non-urinary source (2.44, 1.54-3.85) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (1.27, 1.18-1.36). Inappropriate empirical therapy was not associated with increased mortality (0.81, 0.49-1.33). Among 2135 patients surviving ≥48 h, hospital-acquired infection (1.59, 1.21-2.09), baseline endotracheal tube (1.63, 1.13-2.36) and ICU admission (1.53, 1.02-2.28) were additional risk factors. Risk factors for mortality among patients with P. aeruginosa were mostly irreversible. Early appropriate empirical therapy was not associated with reduced mortality. Further research should be conducted to explore subgroups that may not benefit from broad-spectrum antipseudomonal empirical therapy. Efforts should focus on prevention of infection, mainly hospital-acquired infection and multidrug-resistant pseudomonal infection.

Highlighting the gaps in quantifying the economic burden of surgical site infections associated with antimicrobial-resistant bacteria.

Antibiotics are the pillar of surgery from prophylaxis to treatment; any failure is potentially a leading cause for increased morbidity and mortality. Robust data on the burden of SSI especially those due to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) show variable rates between countries and geographical regions but accurate estimates of the incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) due to AMR and its related global economic impact are yet to be determined. Quantifying the burden of SSI treatment is an incentive to sensitize governments, healthcare systems, and the society to invest in quality improvement and sustainable development. However in the absence of a unified epidemiologically sound infection definition of SSI and a well-designed global surveillance system, the end result is a lack of accurate and reliable data that limits the comparability of estimates between countries and the possibility of tracking changes to inform healthcare professionals about the appropriateness of implemented infection prevention and control strategies. This review aims to highlight the reported gaps in surveillance methods, epidemiologic data, and evidence-based SSI prevention practices and in the methodologies undertaken for the evaluation of the economic burden of SSI associated with AMR bacteria. If efforts to tackle this problem are taken in isolation without a global alliance and data is still lacking generalizability and comparability, we may see the future as a race between the global research efforts for the advancement in surgery and the global alarming reports of the increased incidence of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens threatening to undermine any achievement.

Young doctors' perspectives on antibiotic use and resistance: a multinational and inter-specialty cross-sectional European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) survey.

BACKGROUND: Postgraduate training has the potential to shape the prescribing practices of young doctors. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the practices, attitudes and beliefs on antibiotic use and resistance in young doctors of different specialties. METHODS: We performed an international web-based exploratory survey. Principal component analysis (PCA) and bivariate and multivariate [analysis of variance (ANOVA)] analyses were used to investigate differences between young doctors according to their country of specialization, specialty, year of training and gender. RESULTS: Of the 2366 participants from France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain, 54.2% of young doctors prescribed antibiotics predominantly as instructed by a mentor. Associations between the variability of answers and the country of training were observed across most questions, followed by variability according to the specialty. Very few differences were associated with the year of training and gender. PCA revealed five dimensions of antibiotic prescribing culture: self-assessment of knowledge, consideration of side effects, perception of prescription patterns, consideration of patient sickness and perception of antibiotic resistance. Only the country of specialization (partial η2 0.010-0.111) and the type of specialization (0.013-0.032) had a significant effect on all five identified dimensions (P < 0.01). The strongest effects were observed on self-assessed knowledge and in the perception of antibiotic resistance. CONCLUSIONS: The country of specialization followed by the type of specialization are the most important determinants of young doctors' perspectives on antibiotic use and resistance. The inclusion of competencies in antibiotic use in all specialty curricula and international harmonization of training should be considered.

Elaboration of Consensus Clinical Endpoints to Evaluate Antimicrobial Treatment Efficacy in Future Hospital-acquired/Ventilator-associated Bacterial Pneumonia Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP and VABP, respectively) are important for the evaluation of new antimicrobials. However, the heterogeneity in endpoints used in RCTs evaluating treatment of HABP/VABP may puzzle clinicians. The aim of this work was to reach a consensus on clinical endpoints to consider in future clinical trials evaluating antimicrobial treatment efficacy for HABP/VABP. METHODS: Twenty-six international experts from intensive care, infectious diseases, and the pharmaceutical industry were polled using the Delphi method. RESULTS: The panel recommended a hierarchical composite endpoint including, by priority order, (1) survival at day 28, (2) mechanical ventilation-free days through day 28, and (3) clinical cure between study days 7 and 10 for VABP; and (1) survival (day 28) and (2) clinical cure (days 7-10) for HABP. Clinical cure was defined as the combination of resolution of signs and symptoms present at enrollment and improvement or lack of progression of radiological signs. More than 70% of the experts agreed to assess survival and mechanical ventilation-free days though day 28, and clinical cure between day 7 and day 10 after treatment initiation. Finally, the hierarchical order of endpoint components was reached after 3 Delphi rounds (72% agreement). CONCLUSIONS: We provide a multinational expert consensus on separate hierarchical composite endpoints for VABP and HABP, and on a definition of clinical cure that could be considered for use in future HABP/VABP clinical trials.

2018 WSES/SIS-E consensus conference: recommendations for the management of skin and soft-tissue infections.

Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) encompass a variety of pathological conditions that involve the skin and underlying subcutaneous tissue, fascia, or muscle, ranging from simple superficial infections to severe necrotizing infections. SSTIs are a frequent clinical problem in surgical departments. In order to clarify key issues in the management of SSTIs, a task force of experts met in Bertinoro, Italy, on June 28, 2018, for a specialist multidisciplinary consensus conference under the auspices of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and the Surgical Infection Society Europe (SIS-E). The multifaceted nature of these infections has led to a collaboration among general and emergency surgeons, intensivists, and infectious disease specialists, who have shared these clinical practice recommendations.

The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery: defining a model for antimicrobial stewardship-results from an international cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. RESULTS: The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p < 0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). CONCLUSION: The survey showed a heterogeneous organization of ASPs worldwide, demonstrating the necessity of a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in the battle against antimicrobial resistance in surgical infections, and the importance of educational efforts towards this goal.