Impact of coexisting pneumonia in the patients admitted with Clostridium difficile infection: a retrospective study from a national inpatient database

2021 ◽  
pp. jim-2021-001820
Author(s):  
Asim Kichloo ◽  
Zain El-Amir ◽  
Dushyant Singh Dahiya ◽  
Jagmeet Singh ◽  
Dhanshree Solanki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Acute Renal Failure ◽  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Hospital Charges ◽  
Inpatient Setting ◽  
Antibiotic Administration ◽  
The Impact

Clostridium difficile is a gram-positive anaerobic spore forming bacillus that can cause infection in a setting of antibiotic use. Pneumonia is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in an inpatient setting and is frequently associated with significant antibiotic administration. This study aims to compare the outcomes of C. difficile infection (CDI) with and without pneumonia to determine the impact of pneumonia in hospitalized patients with CDI. This population-based retrospective observational propensity matched analysis study uses data from the National Inpatient Sample database for the years 2016 and 2017. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, total hospital charges, and mean length of stay. Secondary outcomes were the rates of sepsis, septic shock, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), acute renal failure, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. In-hospital mortality was noted to be higher in patients with pneumonia than those without (6.5% vs 1.2%, adjusted OR (aOR) 3.85; 95% CI 2.90 to 5.11, p<0.001). The following outcomes were more prevalent in patients with pneumonia compared with those without pneumonia: sepsis (9.8% vs 1.8%, aOR 4.69, 95% CI 3.73 to 5.87, p<0.001), septic shock (4.0% vs 0.5%, aOR 6.32, 95% CI 4.43 to 9.03, p<0.001), NSTEMI (1.9% vs 0.5%, aOR 2.95, 95% CI 1.85 to 4.71, p<0.001), and acute renal failure (31.5% vs 23.1%, aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.40, p=0.003). In conclusion, patients with pneumonia were associated with significantly higher rates of system-based complications and higher in-hospital mortality rates.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine and Tocilizumab in Patients With COVID-19: Single-Center Retrospective Chart Review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohaib Roomi ◽  
Waqas Ullah ◽  
Faizan Ahmed ◽  
Soban Farooq ◽  
Usama Sadiq ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Acute Renal Failure ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Odds Ratios ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND During the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an unfounded fervor surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and tocilizumab (TCZ); however, evidence on their efficacy and safety have been controversial. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study is to evaluate the overall clinical effectiveness of HCQ and TCZ in patients with COVID-19. We hypothesize that HCQ and TCZ use in these patients will be associated with a reduction in in-hospital mortality, upgrade to intensive medical care, invasive mechanical ventilation, or acute renal failure needing dialysis. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was performed to determine the impact of HCQ and TCZ use on hard clinical outcomes during hospitalization. A total of 176 hospitalized patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis was included. Patients were divided into two comparison groups: (1) HCQ (n=144) vs no-HCQ (n=32) and (2) TCZ (n=32) vs no-TCZ (n=144). The mean age, baseline comorbidities, and other medications used during hospitalization were uniformly distributed among all the groups. Independent <i>t</i> tests and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to calculate mean differences and adjusted odds ratios with 95% CIs, respectively. RESULTS The unadjusted odds ratio for patients upgraded to a higher level of care (ie, intensive care unit) (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.19-5.69; <i>P</i>=.003) and reductions in C-reactive protein (CRP) level on day 7 of hospitalization (21% vs 56%, OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.55; <i>P</i>=.002) were significantly higher in the TCZ group compared to the control group. There was no significant difference in the odds of in-hospital mortality, upgrade to intensive medical care, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, acute kidney failure necessitating dialysis, or discharge from the hospital after recovery in both the HCQ and TCZ groups compared to their respective control groups. Adjusted odds ratios controlled for baseline comorbidities and medications closely followed the unadjusted estimates. CONCLUSIONS In this cohort of patients with COVID-19, neither HCQ nor TCZ offered a significant reduction in in-hospital mortality, upgrade to intensive medical care, invasive mechanical ventilation, or acute renal failure needing dialysis. These results are similar to the recently published preliminary results of the HCQ arm of the Recovery trial, which showed no clinical benefit from the use of HCQ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (the TCZ arm is ongoing). Double-blinded randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the impact of these drugs in larger patient samples so that data-driven guidelines can be deduced to combat this global pandemic.

scholarly journals Outcomes and risk factors of septic shock in patients with infective endocarditis: a prospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan M Pericàs ◽  
Marta Hernández-Meneses ◽  
Patricia Muñoz ◽  
Ana Álvarez-Uría ◽  
Blanca Pinilla-Llorente ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Septic Shock ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Acute Renal Failure ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Liver Disease ◽  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Persistent Bacteremia

Abstract Background Little is known about the characteristics and impact of septic shock (SS) on the outcomes of infective endocarditis (IE). We aimed to investigate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with IE presenting with SS and to compare them to those of IE patients with sepsis (Se) and those with neither Se nor SS (no-Se-SS). Methods Prospective cohort study of 4,864 IE patients from 35 Spanish centers (2008 to 2018). Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors for SS and mortality. Results SS and Se presented respectively in 597 (12.3%) and 559 (11.5%) patients. Patients with SS were younger and presented significantly higher rates of diabetes, chronic renal and liver disease, transplantation, nosocomial acquisition, S.aureus, IE complications, and in-hospital mortality (62.5%, 37.7% for Se and 18.2% for no-Se-SS,p&lt;.001). S.aureus (OR 1.94, 95%CI 1.34-2.81,p&lt;.001), Gram negative (OR 2.21,95%CI 1.25-3.91,p.006), nosocomial acquisition (OR 1.44,95%CI 1.07-1.94,p.015), persistent bacteremia (OR 1.82, 95%CI 1.24-2.68,p.002), acute renal failure (OR 3.02,95% 2.28-4.01,p&lt;.001), CNS emboli (OR 1.48,1.08-2.01,p.013), and larger vegetation size (OR 1.01,95%CI 1.00-1.02,p.020) were associated with a higher risk of developing SS. Charlson score, heart failure, persistent bacteremia, acute renal failure, mechanical ventilation, worsening of liver disease, S.aureus and receiving aminoglycosides within the first 24h were associated with higher in-hospital mortality, whereas male sex, native valve IE and cardiac surgery were associated with lower mortality. Conclusions SS is frequent and entails dismal prognosis. Early identification of patients at risk of developing SS and early assessment for cardiac surgery appear as key factors to improve outcomes.

scholarly journals Implementation of earlier antibiotic administration in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock in Japan: a descriptive analysis of a prospective observational study

Critical Care ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshikazu Abe ◽  
◽  
Shigeki Kushimoto ◽  
Yasuharu Tokuda ◽  
Gary S. Phillips ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Antibiotic Administration ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Sepsis Care

Abstract Background Time to antibiotic administration is a key element in sepsis care; however, it is difficult to implement sepsis care bundles. Additionally, sepsis is different from other emergent conditions including acute coronary syndrome, stroke, or trauma. We aimed to describe the association between time to antibiotic administration and outcomes in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock in Japan. Methods This prospective observational study enrolled 1184 adult patients diagnosed with severe sepsis based on the Sepsis-2 criteria and admitted to 59 intensive care units (ICUs) in Japan between January 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017, as the sepsis cohort of the Focused Outcomes Research in Emergency Care in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Sepsis and Trauma (FORECAST) study. We compared the characteristics and in-hospital mortality of patients administered with antibiotics at varying durations after sepsis recognition, i.e., 0–60, 61–120, 121–180, 181–240, 241–360, and 361–1440 min, and estimated the impact of antibiotic timing on risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality using the generalized estimating equation model (GEE) with an exchangeable, within-group correlation matrix, with “hospital” as the grouping variable. Results Data from 1124 patients in 54 hospitals were used for analyses. Of these, 30.5% and 73.9% received antibiotics within 1 h and 3 h, respectively. Overall, the median time to antibiotic administration was 102 min [interquartile range (IQR), 55–189]. Compared with patients diagnosed in the emergency department [90 min (IQR, 48–164 min)], time to antibiotic administration was shortest in patients diagnosed in ICUs [60 min (39–180 min)] and longest in patients transferred from wards [120 min (62–226)]. Overall crude mortality was 23.4%, where patients in the 0–60 min group had the highest mortality (28.0%) and a risk-adjusted mortality rate [28.7% (95% CI 23.3–34.1%)], whereas those in the 61–120 min group had the lowest mortality (20.2%) and risk-adjusted mortality rates [21.6% (95% CI 16.5–26.6%)]. Differences in mortality were noted only between the 0–60 min and 61–120 min groups. Conclusions We could not find any association between earlier antibiotic administration and reduction in in-hospital mortality in patients with severe sepsis.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine and Tocilizumab in Patients With COVID-19: Single-Center Retrospective Chart Review

10.2196/21758 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. e21758 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohaib Roomi ◽  
Waqas Ullah ◽  
Faizan Ahmed ◽  
Soban Farooq ◽  
Usama Sadiq ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Acute Renal Failure ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Odds Ratios ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact

Background During the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an unfounded fervor surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and tocilizumab (TCZ); however, evidence on their efficacy and safety have been controversial. Objective The purpose of this study is to evaluate the overall clinical effectiveness of HCQ and TCZ in patients with COVID-19. We hypothesize that HCQ and TCZ use in these patients will be associated with a reduction in in-hospital mortality, upgrade to intensive medical care, invasive mechanical ventilation, or acute renal failure needing dialysis. Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed to determine the impact of HCQ and TCZ use on hard clinical outcomes during hospitalization. A total of 176 hospitalized patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis was included. Patients were divided into two comparison groups: (1) HCQ (n=144) vs no-HCQ (n=32) and (2) TCZ (n=32) vs no-TCZ (n=144). The mean age, baseline comorbidities, and other medications used during hospitalization were uniformly distributed among all the groups. Independent t tests and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to calculate mean differences and adjusted odds ratios with 95% CIs, respectively. Results The unadjusted odds ratio for patients upgraded to a higher level of care (ie, intensive care unit) (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.19-5.69; P=.003) and reductions in C-reactive protein (CRP) level on day 7 of hospitalization (21% vs 56%, OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.55; P=.002) were significantly higher in the TCZ group compared to the control group. There was no significant difference in the odds of in-hospital mortality, upgrade to intensive medical care, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, acute kidney failure necessitating dialysis, or discharge from the hospital after recovery in both the HCQ and TCZ groups compared to their respective control groups. Adjusted odds ratios controlled for baseline comorbidities and medications closely followed the unadjusted estimates. Conclusions In this cohort of patients with COVID-19, neither HCQ nor TCZ offered a significant reduction in in-hospital mortality, upgrade to intensive medical care, invasive mechanical ventilation, or acute renal failure needing dialysis. These results are similar to the recently published preliminary results of the HCQ arm of the Recovery trial, which showed no clinical benefit from the use of HCQ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (the TCZ arm is ongoing). Double-blinded randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the impact of these drugs in larger patient samples so that data-driven guidelines can be deduced to combat this global pandemic.

scholarly journals Low-Dose Aminophylline for the Treatment of Neonatal Non-Oliguric Renal Failure—Case Series and Review of the Literature

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
Bethany A. Lynch ◽  
Peter Gal ◽  
J. Laurence Ransom ◽  
Rita Q. Carlos ◽  
Mary Ann V.T. Dimaguila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Failure ◽  
Renal Function ◽  
Acute Renal Failure ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Oliguric Renal Failure ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVE Aminophylline is a methylxanthine with multiple physiologic actions. At low doses, aminophylline can antagonize adenosine and improve renal function via increased glomerular filtration rate. Despite its clinical use, little data exists in neonates for this indication. Therefore, the objective of this report is to describe the impact of aminophylline on renal function indices in a series of neonates with acute renal failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a retrospective chart review of 13 neonates with acute renal failure who received aminophylline during a 15-month study period. Aminophylline was administered at 1 mg/kg intravenously or orally every twelve hours. Forty-six percent (n = 6) of the patients received a 5 mg/kg loading dose before initiation of maintenance therapy. Most patients had already received other treatments for renal failure, including diuretics and dopamine. RESULTS Resolution of acute renal failure (with normalization of serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen) was documented in 10 patients (77%). Four of the thirteen patients died from complications due to their prematurity. Failure of low-dose aminophylline was observed in 3 of the 4 patients who died. CONCLUSIONS Low-dose aminophylline in neonates with acute renal failure is associated with an improvement in renal function indices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document