Case presentation: Here, we present a rare case of E. anophelis meningitis in a Danish male, who had a travel exposure to Malaysia 7 weeks before hospitalization. A multidrug-resistant Elizabethkingia species was isolated from blood and cerebrospinal fluid, and genomic sequencing was used to characterize the phylogenetic position of the isolate, which was determined as associated with previously described sublineage 11. The patient was successfully treated with intravenous moxifloxacin and rifampicin for 2 weeks with no major sequelae, but we did not find the source of transmission.
Conclusion: All clinical microbiologists should be aware of the present limitations of the MALDI-TOF MS systems for correct species identification, and therefore we recommend the use of genome sequencing for the correct identification at the species and sublineage level.
CONCLUSION: Although cefepime-induced thrombocytopenia is rare, clinicians should be alert to this potential adverse effect among critically ill patients.
METHODS: We used the methodology employed by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control to assess the prevalence of HAIs in Punjab Province, Pakistan. Data were collected from 13 hospitals using a structured data collection tool.
RESULTS: Out of 1,553 hospitalized patients, 130 (8.4%) had symptoms of HAIs. The most common HAI was surgical site infection (40.0%), followed by bloodstream infection (21.5%), and lower respiratory tract infection (14.6%). The prevalence of HAI was higher in private sector hospitals (25.0%) and among neonates (23.8%) and patients admitted to intensive care units (33.3%). Patients without HAIs were admitted mainly to public sector hospitals and adult medical and surgical wards.
CONCLUSIONS: The study found a high rate of HAIs among hospitals in Pakistan, especially surgical site infections, bloodstream infections, and lower respiratory tract infections. This needs to be addressed to reduce morbidity, mortality, and costs in the future, and further research is planned.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess systematically the characteristics of patients and risk factors associated with nosocomial infections among ESRD patients undergoing hemodialysis.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify eligible studies published during the period from inception to December 2018 pertaining to risk factors associated with nosocomial infections among hemodialysis patients. The relevant studies were generated through a computerized search on five databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and Scopus) using the Mesh Words: nosocomial infections, hospital acquired infections, healthcare associated infections, end stage renal disease, end stage renal failure, hemodialysis, and risk factors. The complete protocol has been registered under PROSPERO (CRD42019124099).
RESULTS: Initially, 1411 articles were retrieved. Out of these, 24 were duplicates and hence were removed. Out of 1387 remaining articles, 1337 were removed based on irrelevant titles and/or abstracts. Subsequently, the full texts of 50 articles were reviewed and 41 studies were excluded at this stage due to lack of relevant information. Finally, nine articles were selected for this review. Longer hospital stay, longer duration on hemodialysis, multiple catheter sites, longer catheterization, age group, lower white blood cell count, history of blood transfusion, and diabetes were identified as the major risk factors for nosocomial infections among hemodialysis patients.
CONCLUSION: The results of this review indicate an information gap and potential benefits of additional preventive measures to further reduce the risk of infections in hemodialysis population. Moreover, several patient-related and facility-related risk factors were consistently observed in the studies included in this review, which require optimal control measures.
DESIGN: This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study. Data on epidemiology, ventilation, therapies, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. Patients were classified into two mutually exclusive groups (extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome and pulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome) based on etiologies. Primary outcome was PICU mortality. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to identify risk factors for mortality.
SETTING: Ten multidisciplinary PICUs in Asia.
PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated children meeting the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference criteria for pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome between 2009 and 2015.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one of 307 patients (13.4%) and 266 of 307 patients (86.6%) were classified into extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome and pulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome groups, respectively. The most common causes for extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome and pulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome were sepsis (82.9%) and pneumonia (91.7%), respectively. Children with extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome were older, had higher admission severity scores, and had a greater proportion of organ dysfunction compared with pulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome group. Patients in the extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome group had higher mortality (48.8% vs 24.8%; p = 0.002) and reduced ventilator-free days (median 2.0 d [interquartile range 0.0-18.0 d] vs 19.0 d [0.5-24.0 d]; p = 0.001) compared with the pulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome group. After adjusting for site, severity of illness, comorbidities, multiple organ dysfunction, and severity of acute respiratory distress syndrome, extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome etiology was not associated with mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.56 [95% CI, 0.90-2.71]).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with extrapulmonary pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome were sicker and had poorer clinical outcomes. However, after adjusting for confounders, it was not an independent risk factor for mortality.