The availability of highly sensitive molecular tests for the detection of
in feces leads to overtreatment of patients who are probably only colonized. In this prospective study, the usefulness of ...fecal calprotectin (fCP) is evaluated in a cohort of patients with detection of toxigenic
in feces. Patients were classified by an infectious diseases consultant blinded to fCP results into three groups-group I, presumed
infection (CDI); group II, doubtful but treated CDI; and group III, presumed
colonization or self-limited CDI not needing treatment. One hundred and thirty-four patients were included. The median fCP concentrations were 410 (138-815) μg/g in group I, 188 (57-524) μg/g in group II, and 51 (26-97) μg/g in group III (26 cases);
< 0.05 for all comparisons. In forty-five out of 134 cases (33.5%), the fCP concentrations were below 100 µg/g. In conclusion, fCP is low in most patients who do not need treatment against
, and should be investigated as a potentially useful test in the management of patients with detected toxigenic
.
We aimed to test the non-inferiority of oral versus intravenous hydration in the incidence of contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) in elderly outpatients undergoing a contrast-enhanced ...computed tomography (CE-CT) scan.
PNIC-Na (NCT03476460) is a phase-2, single-center, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial. We included outpatients undergoing a CE-CT scan, >65 years having at least one risk factor for CA-AKI, such as diabetes, heart failure, or an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m². Participants were randomized (1:1) to oral sodium-chloride capsules or intravenous hydration. The primary outcome was an increase in serum creatinine >0.3 mg/dL or a reduction in eGFR >25% within 48 h. The non-inferiority margin was set at 5%.
A total of 271 subjects (mean age 74 years, 66% male) were randomized, and 252 were considered for the main analysis (per-protocol). A total of 123 received oral hydration and 129 intravenous. CA-AKI occurred in 9 (3.6%) of 252 patients and 5/123 (4.1%) in the oral-hydration group vs. 4/129 (3.1%) in the intravenous-hydration group. The absolute difference between the groups was 1.0% (95% CI -4.8% to 7.0%), and the upper limit of the 95% CI exceeded the pre-established non-inferiority margin. No major safety concerns were observed.
The incidence of CA-AKI was lower than expected. Although both regimens showed similar incidences of CA-AKI, the non-inferiority was not shown.
Cancer patients are more susceptible to infections, and infection can be more severe than in patients without cancer diagnosis. We conducted this retrospective study in patients admitted for ...SARS-CoV-2 infection in order to find differences in inflammatory markers and mortality in cancer patients compared to others.
We reviewed the electronic records of patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by PCR from March to September 2020. Data on socio-demographics, comorbidities, inflammatory makers, and cancer-related features were analyzed.
2,772 patients were admitted for SARS-CoV-2, to the Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal in Madrid during this period. Of these, 2,527 (91%) had no history of neoplastic disease, 164 (5.9%) patients had a prior history of cancer but were not undergoing oncological treatment at the time of infection, and 81 (2.9%) were in active treatment. Mortality in patients without a history of cancer was 19.5%, 28.6% for patients with a prior history of cancer, and 34% in patients with active cancer treatment. Patients in active oncology treatment with the highest mortality rate were those diagnosed with lung cancer (OR 5.6 95% CI: 2.2-14.1). In the multivariate study, active oncological treatment (OR 2.259 95% CI: 1.35-3.77) and chemotherapy treatment (OR 3.624 95% CI: 1.17-11.17), were statistically significant factors for the risk of death for the whole group and for the group with active oncological treatment, respectively.
Cancer patients on active systemic treatment have an increased risk of mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially with lung cancer or chemotherapy treatment.
Abstract Background Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) occurs in various contexts and care settings and is managed by multiple specialists who are not experts in its management. While there are ...many initiatives to improve the diagnosis and avoid overdiagnosis, there is less focus on the overall management of the infection. Methods We studied a cohort of patients with a positive test result for toxigenic C difficile in 2 hospitals. Hospital A has a program that provides advice from an infectious disease specialist (IDS) and promotes continuity of care by providing a phone number to contact the IDS. Hospital B does not have any specific CDI program. The evaluation assessed the proportion of patients not treated (carriers or self-limited disease), adherence to Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines, access to novel therapies, recurrence and mortality rates, and readmission and emergency department visits due to CDI. We assessed the program's effectiveness through a logistic regression model adjusted for covariates chosen by clinical criteria. Results Hospital A avoided more unnecessary treatments (19.3% vs 11.5%), provided access to novel therapies more frequently (35.3% vs 13%), and adhered more closely to current guidelines (95.8% vs 71.3%). Although the mortality and recurrence rates did not differ, the absence of an intervention program was associated with greater odds of admission due to recurrence (odds ratio, 4.19; P = .037) and more visits to the emergency department due to CDI (odds ratio, 8.74; P = .001). Conclusions Implementation of a CDI intervention program based on recommendations from IDSs and improved access to specialized care during the follow-up is associated with enhanced quality of CDI management and potential reductions in hospital resource utilization.
We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model, based on clinical history and examination findings on initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), to identify patients at risk of ...critical outcomes.
We used data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 132 centres in Spain (23rd March to 21st May 2020). For the development cohort, tertiary referral hospitals were selected, while the validation cohort included smaller hospitals. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or admission to intensive care unit. Clinical signs and symptoms, demographics, and medical history ascertained at presentation were screened using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, and logistic regression was used to construct the predictive model.
There were 10 433 patients, 7850 in the development cohort (primary outcome 25.1%, 1967/7850) and 2583 in the validation cohort (outcome 27.0%, 698/2583). The PRIORITY model included: age, dependency, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, dyspnoea, tachypnoea, confusion, systolic blood pressure, and SpO2 ≤93% or oxygen requirement. The model showed high discrimination for critical illness in both the development (C-statistic 0.823; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.813, 0.834) and validation (C-statistic 0.794; 95%CI 0.775, 0.813) cohorts. A freely available web-based calculator was developed based on this model (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/2344).
The PRIORITY model, based on easily obtained clinical information, had good discrimination and generalizability for identifying COVID-19 patients at risk of critical outcomes.
PDF
