RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) body washes and emollient application may modulate bacterial pathogen colonization and prevent neonatal hospital-acquired infections. METHODS: This pilot, non-randomized, open-label trial, enrolled preterm neonates (1000-1500g; day 1-3 of life) at a tertiary hospital in Cape Town, South Africa. Participants were sequentially allocated to 4 trial arms (n=20 each): 1% aqueous CHG (CHG), 1% CHG plus emollient (CHG+EM), emollient only (EM) and standard of care (SOC: no antiseptic/emollient). Trial treatment/s were applied daily for 10 days (d) post-enrolment, documenting neonatal skin condition score. Anterior nose, neck, umbilical and perianal swabs for bacterial culture were collected at d1, d3, d10 and d16 post-enrolment, (±1 day), reporting pathogen acquisition rates and semi-quantitative bacterial colony counts. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03896893; trial status: closed). FINDINGS: Eighty preterm neonates (mean gestational age 30 weeks [SD 2]) were enrolled between 4 March and 26 August 2019. The bacterial pathogen acquisition rate (comparing d1 and d16 swabs) varied from 33·9% [95%CI 22·9-47·0] at the umbilicus, 39·3% [95%CI 27·6-52·4] at the neck, to 71·4% [95%CI 58·5-81·7] at both the nose and perianal region. At d10, CHG babies had reduced bacterial density detected from neck, umbilicus, and perianal swabs compared to other groups (see Table 3). Following intervention cessation, colonization density was similar across all trial arms, but S. aureus colonization was more prevalent among EM and CHG+EM babies. Neonatal skin condition score improved in babies receiving emollient application (EM: -0·87 [95%CI 0·69-1·06] and CHG+EM: -0·73 [0·45-0·99]), compared to the SOC and CHG arms (Table 2); no CHG-related skin reactions occurred. INTERPRETATION: Bacterial colonization density was significantly reduced in babies receiving 1% CHG washes but colonization levels rebounded rapidly post-intervention. Emollient application improved skin condition but was associated with higher rates of S. aureus colonization. FUNDING: South African Medical Research Council; National Institutes of Health (TW010682).
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Sporotrichosis is a rare fungal infection in transplant patients; among these patients, it occurs mostly in renal transplant patients. Sporothrix schenkii is the primary pathogen responsible. A high index of suspicion is required to make the diagnosis keeping important differential diagnoses in mind. History of trauma through recreational or occupational exposure to the fungus may assist in making the diagnosis. Treatment is difficult, with long-term use of potentially nephrotoxic and cytochrome P450 inhibitor antifungal agents leading to potential calcineurin inhibitors toxicity. We describe two renal transplant patients presenting with distinct sporotrichosis infection: "Case 2" being only the second reported case ever of meningeal sporotrichosis. We subsequently review the general aspects of sporotrichosis, specifically in renal transplant patients as described in the medical literature. CASE PRESENTATION: Case 1, a 43-year-old mixed ancestry male patient presented with a non-healing ulcer on the left arm for 1 year, he was diagnosed with cutaneous sporotrichosis and was successfully treated with itraconazole monotherapy. Case 2, a 56-year-old mixed ancestry male patient presented with a slow decline in functions, confusion, inappropriate behavior, rigors and significant loss of weight and appetite over the past 4 months, he was diagnosed with meningeal sporotrichosis and was successfully treated with a combination of deoxycholate amphotericin B and itraconazole. CONCLUSION: Physicians taking care of renal transplant patients should have a high index of suspicion for sporotrichosis infection particularly when conventional therapy for common conditions fails. Susceptibility testing is recommended to identify the most effective antifungal agent and its dose. The slow nature of growth of Sporothrix schenkii necessitates patients to be on amphotericin B until the time results are available. Finally, there is a need to be aware of potential drug-drug interactions of the azoles with calcineurin inhibitors and the required dose adjustments to prevent therapy related adverse events.