-
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Aug 2022Precise estimates of mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) are important to convey prognosis and guide the design of interventional studies. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Precise estimates of mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) are important to convey prognosis and guide the design of interventional studies.
OBJECTIVES
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate all-cause mortality in SAB and explore mortality change over time.
DATA SOURCES
The MEDLINE and Embase databases, as well as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were searched from January 1, 1991 to May 7, 2021.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Human observational studies on patients with S. aureus bloodstream infection were included.
PARTICIPANTS
The study analyzed data of patients with a positive blood culture for S. aureus.
METHODS
Two independent reviewers extracted study data and assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A generalized, linear, mixed random effects model was used to pool estimates.
RESULTS
A total of 341 studies were included, describing a total of 536,791 patients. From 2011 onward, the estimated mortality was 10.4% (95% CI, 9.0%-12.1%) at 7 days, 13.3% (95% CI, 11.1%-15.8%) at 2 weeks, 18.1% (95% CI, 16.3%-20.0%) at 1 month, 27.0% (95% CI, 21.5%-33.3%) at 3 months, and 30.2% (95% CI, 22.4%-39.3%) at 1 year. In a meta-regression model of 1-month mortality, methicillin-resistant S. aureus had a higher mortality rate (adjusted OR (aOR): 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06 per 10% increase in methicillin-resistant S. aureus proportion). Compared with prior to 2001, more recent time periods had a lower mortality rate (aOR: 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.03 for 2001-2010; aOR: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.97 for 2011 onward).
CONCLUSIONS
SAB mortality has decreased over the last 3 decades. However, more than one in four patients will die within 3 months, and continuous improvement in care remains necessary.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacteremia; Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Sepsis; Staphylococcal Infections; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 35339678
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.03.015 -
Open Forum Infectious Diseases Jul 2021The treatment of staphylococcal prosthetic joint infection (PJI) with debridement, antibiotics, and retention of the implant (DAIR) often results in failure. An... (Review)
Review
Outcome of Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention for Staphylococcal Hip and Knee Prosthetic Joint Infections, Focused on Rifampicin Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
The treatment of staphylococcal prosthetic joint infection (PJI) with debridement, antibiotics, and retention of the implant (DAIR) often results in failure. An important evidence gap concerns the treatment with rifampicin for PJI. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the outcome of staphylococcal hip and/or knee PJI after DAIR, focused on the role of rifampicin. Studies published until September 2, 2020 were included. Success rates were stratified for type of joint and type of micro-organism. Sixty-four studies were included. The pooled risk ratio for rifampicin effectiveness was 1.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.22). The pooled success rate was 69% for hip PJI, 54% for knee PJI, 83% for coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) hip PJI, and 73% for CNS knee PJI. Success rates for MRSA PJI (58%) were similar to MSSA PJI (60%). The meta-analysis indicates that rifampicin may only prevent a small fraction of all treatment failures.
PubMed: 34258321
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofab298 -
Journal of Global Antimicrobial... Mar 2020Staphylococcus aureus is one of the most common pathogens causing nosocomial and community-acquired infections associated with high morbidity and mortality. Mupirocin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Staphylococcus aureus is one of the most common pathogens causing nosocomial and community-acquired infections associated with high morbidity and mortality. Mupirocin has been increasingly used for treatment of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infections. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of mupirocin-resistant S. aureus (MuRSA), mupirocin-resistant MRSA (MuRMRSA), high-level MuRSA (HLMuRSA) and high-level MuRMRSA (HLMuRMRSA) worldwide.
METHODS
Online databases including Medline, Embase and Web of Science were searched (2000-2018) to identify studies addressing the prevalence of MuRSA, MuRMRSA, HLMuRSA and HLMuRMRSA. STATA v. software was used to interpret the data.
RESULTS
Of the 2243 records identified from the databases, 30 and 63 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria for MuRSA and MuRMRSA, respectively. Finally, 27 and 60 studies were included separately for HLMuRSA and HLMuRMRSA, respectively. The analyses revealed pooled and averaged prevalences of MuRSA, MuRMRSA, HLMuRSA and HLMuRMRSA of 7.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.2-9.0%], 13.8% (95% CI 12.0-15.6%), 8.5% (95% CI 6.3-10.7%) and 8.1% (95% CI 6.8-9.4%), respectively.
CONCLUSION
Overall, these results show a global increase in the prevalence of HLMuRSA and HLMuRMRSA among clinical S. aureus isolates over time. However, there was only a significant increase in the prevalence of MuRMRSA compared with the other categories, especially MuRSA. Since mupirocin remains the most effective antibiotic for MSSA and MRSA decolonisation both in patients and healthcare personnel, a reduction of its effectiveness presents a risk for invasive infection. Monitoring of mupirocin resistance development remains critical.
Topics: Community-Acquired Infections; Cross Infection; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Mupirocin; Population Surveillance; Prevalence; Staphylococcal Infections
PubMed: 31442624
DOI: 10.1016/j.jgar.2019.07.032 -
Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses Sep 2016Coinfecting bacterial pathogens are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in influenza. However, there remains a paucity of literature on the magnitude of coinfection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Coinfecting bacterial pathogens are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in influenza. However, there remains a paucity of literature on the magnitude of coinfection in influenza patients.
METHOD
A systematic search of MeSH, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PubMed was performed. Studies of humans in which all individuals had laboratory confirmed influenza, and all individuals were tested for an array of common bacterial species, met inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies including 3215 participants met all inclusion criteria. Common etiologies were defined from a subset of eight articles. There was high heterogeneity in the results (I(2) = 95%), with reported coinfection rates ranging from 2% to 65%. Although only a subset of papers were responsible for observed heterogeneity, subanalyses and meta-regression analysis found no study characteristic that was significantly associated with coinfection. The most common coinfecting species were Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus, which accounted for 35% (95% CI, 14%-56%) and 28% (95% CI, 16%-40%) of infections, respectively; a wide range of other pathogens caused the remaining infections. An assessment of bias suggested that lack of small-study publications may have biased the results.
CONCLUSIONS
The frequency of coinfection in the published studies included in this review suggests that although providers should consider possible bacterial coinfection in all patients hospitalized with influenza, they should not assume all patients are coinfected and be sure to properly treat underlying viral processes. Further, high heterogeneity suggests additional large-scale studies are needed to better understand the etiology of influenza bacterial coinfection.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Coinfection; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Influenza, Human; Male; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Middle Aged; Pneumococcal Infections; Staphylococcal Infections; Streptococcus pneumoniae; Young Adult
PubMed: 27232677
DOI: 10.1111/irv.12398 -
Open Forum Infectious Diseases Nov 2022Based primarily on in vitro and animal models, with little data directly addressing patient outcomes, current guidelines recommend treating staphylococcal prosthetic...
BACKGROUND
Based primarily on in vitro and animal models, with little data directly addressing patient outcomes, current guidelines recommend treating staphylococcal prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) with antibiotic combinations including gentamicin and rifampin. Here, we synthesize the clinical data on adjunctive rifampin and gentamicin in staphylococcal PVE.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of PubMed- and Cochrane-indexed studies reporting outcomes of staphylococcal PVE treated with adjunctive rifampin, gentamicin, both agents, or neither (ie, glycopeptide or β-lactam monotherapy). We recorded outcomes including mortality, relapsed infection, length of stay, nephrotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, and important drug-drug interactions (DDIs).
RESULTS
Four relevant studies were identified. Two studies (n = 117) suggested that adding gentamicin to rifampin-containing regimens did not reduce clinical failure (odds ratio [OR], 0.98 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .39-2.46]), and 2 studies (n = 201) suggested that adding rifampin to gentamicin-containing regimens did not reduce clinical failure (OR, 1.29 [95% CI, .71-2.33]). Neither gentamicin nor rifampin was associated with reduced infection relapse; 1 study found that rifampin treatment was associated with longer hospitalizations (mean, 31.3 vs 42.3 days; < .001). Comparative safety outcomes were rarely reported, but 1 study found rifampin to be associated with hepatoxicity, nephrotoxicity, and DDIs, leading to treatment discontinuation in 31% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS
The existing clinical data do not suggest a benefit of either adjunctive gentamicin or rifampin in staphylococcal PVE. Given that other studies also suggest these agents add nephrotoxicity, hepatoxicity, and risk of DDIs without benefit in staphylococcal endovascular infections, we suggest that recommendations for gentamicin and rifampin in PVE be downgraded and primarily be used within the context of clinical trials.
PubMed: 36408468
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofac583 -
Tropical Medicine & International... Mar 2019We conducted a systematic review of the treatment, prevention and public health control of skin infections including impetigo, scabies, crusted scabies and tinea in...
We conducted a systematic review of the treatment, prevention and public health control of skin infections including impetigo, scabies, crusted scabies and tinea in resource-limited settings where skin infections are endemic. The aim is to inform strategies, guidelines and research to improve skin health in populations that are inequitably affected by infections of the skin and the downstream consequences of these. The systematic review is reported according to the PRISMA statement. From 1759 titles identified, 81 full text studies were reviewed and key findings outlined for impetigo, scabies, crusted scabies and tinea. Improvements in primary care and public health management of skin infections will have broad and lasting impacts on overall quality of life including reductions in morbidity and mortality from sepsis, skeletal infections, kidney and heart disease.
Topics: Dermatomycoses; Humans; Impetigo; Public Health; Scabies
PubMed: 30582783
DOI: 10.1111/tmi.13198 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017Health care-associated infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Hand hygiene is regarded as an effective preventive measure. This is an update of a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Health care-associated infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Hand hygiene is regarded as an effective preventive measure. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the short- and long-term success of strategies to improve compliance to recommendations for hand hygiene, and to determine whether an increase in hand hygiene compliance can reduce rates of health care-associated infection.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted electronic searches of the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL. We conducted the searches from November 2009 to October 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) that evaluated any intervention to improve compliance with hand hygiene using soap and water or alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR), or both.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias for each included study. Meta-analysis was not possible, as there was substantial heterogeneity across studies. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach and present the results narratively in a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
This review includes 26 studies: 14 randomised trials, two non-randomised trials and 10 ITS studies. Most studies were conducted in hospitals or long-term care facilities in different countries, and collected data from a variety of healthcare workers. Fourteen studies assessed the success of different combinations of strategies recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to improve hand hygiene compliance. Strategies consisted of the following: increasing the availability of ABHR, different types of education for staff, reminders (written and verbal), different types of performance feedback, administrative support, and staff involvement. Six studies assessed different types of performance feedback, two studies evaluated education, three studies evaluated cues such as signs or scent, and one study assessed placement of ABHR. Observed hand hygiene compliance was measured in all but three studies which reported product usage. Eight studies also reported either infection or colonisation rates. All studies had two or more sources of high or unclear risks of bias, most often associated with blinding or independence of the intervention.Multimodal interventions that include some but not all strategies recommended in the WHO guidelines may slightly improve hand hygiene compliance (five studies; 56 centres) and may slightly reduce infection rates (three studies; 34 centres), low certainty of evidence for both outcomes.Multimodal interventions that include all strategies recommended in the WHO guidelines may slightly reduce colonisation rates (one study; 167 centres; low certainty of evidence). It is unclear whether the intervention improves hand hygiene compliance (five studies; 184 centres) or reduces infection (two studies; 16 centres) because the certainty of this evidence is very low.Multimodal interventions that contain all strategies recommended in the WHO guidelines plus additional strategies may slightly improve hand hygiene compliance (six studies; 15 centres; low certainty of evidence). It is unclear whether this intervention reduces infection rates (one study; one centre; very low certainty of evidence).Performance feedback may improve hand hygiene compliance (six studies; 21 centres; low certainty of evidence). This intervention probably slightly reduces infection (one study; one centre) and colonisation rates (one study; one centre) based on moderate certainty of evidence.Education may improve hand hygiene compliance (two studies; two centres), low certainty of evidence.Cues such as signs or scent may slightly improve hand hygiene compliance (three studies; three centres), low certainty of evidence.Placement of ABHR close to point of use probably slightly improves hand hygiene compliance (one study; one centre), moderate certainty of evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
With the identified variability in certainty of evidence, interventions, and methods, there remains an urgent need to undertake methodologically robust research to explore the effectiveness of multimodal versus simpler interventions to increase hand hygiene compliance, and to identify which components of multimodal interventions or combinations of strategies are most effective in a particular context.
Topics: Clostridioides difficile; Clostridium Infections; Cross Infection; Hand Disinfection; Health Personnel; Humans; Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient; Interrupted Time Series Analysis; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Staphylococcal Infections
PubMed: 28862335
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005186.pub4 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Dec 2021The septic arthritis of the hip is a complex condition characterized by a variety of clinical presentations, a challenging diagnosis and different surgical treatment... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The septic arthritis of the hip is a complex condition characterized by a variety of clinical presentations, a challenging diagnosis and different surgical treatment options, including arthroscopy, resection arthroplasty and one and two-stage total hip replacement. Each technique reports variable results in terms of infection eradication rate. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the most relevant studies available in current literature and to assess if a better treatment outcome can be predicted based on the microbiology, history, and type of infection (active vs quiescent) of each case.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, including the studies dealing with the treatment of hip septic arthritis in adult patients. Electronic databases, namely the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, were reviewed using a combination of following keywords "septic arthritis" AND "hip joint" OR "hip" AND "adult".
RESULTS
The total number of patients included in this review was 1236 (45% of which females), for 1238 hips. The most common pathogen isolated was Staphylococcus aureus in its Methicillin-sensitive variant ranging from 2 to 37% of cases. Negative cultures were the second most common finding. It was also differentiated the type of infection of the hip, 809 and 417 patients with active and quiescent hip infection, respectively, were analyzed. Eradication rates for two-stage revision arthroplasty ranged between 85 and 100%, for one-stage approach between 94 and 100%, while for arthroscopic debridement/lavage between 89 and 100%.
CONCLUSION
Staphylococcus aureus is the most common microorganism isolated followed by culture negative infections. Arthroscopic, one and two stage procedures can be effective in the treatment of hip septic arthritis when the indication is consistent with the type of infection retrieved.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
IV, therapeutic study.
Topics: Arthritis, Infectious; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroscopy; Debridement; Female; Hip Joint; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Staphylococcal Infections; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34856966
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04843-z -
Paediatrics and International Child... Nov 2018Background Pneumonia is the most common cause of death in children worldwide, accounting for 15% of all deaths of children under 5 years of age. This review summarises...
Background Pneumonia is the most common cause of death in children worldwide, accounting for 15% of all deaths of children under 5 years of age. This review summarises the evidence for the empirical antibiotic treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in neonates and children and puts emphasis on publications since the release of the previous WHO Evidence Summary report published in 2014. Methods A systematic search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia was conducted between 1 January 2013 and 10 November 2016. Results The optimal dosing recommendation for amoxicillin remains unclear with limited pharmacological and clinical evidence. There is limited evidence from surveillance to indicate whether amoxicillin or broader spectrum antibiotics (e.g. third-generation cephalosporins) are being used most commonly for paediatric CAP in different WHO regions. Data are lacking on clinical efficacy in the context of pneumococcal, staphylococcal and mycoplasma disease and the relative contributions of varying first-line and step-down options to the selection of such resistance. Conclusion Further pragmatic trials are required to optimise management of hospitalised children with severe and very severe pneumonia.
Topics: Adolescent; Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cephalosporins; Child; Child, Preschool; Community-Acquired Infections; Guidelines as Topic; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pneumonia, Bacterial; World Health Organization
PubMed: 29790844
DOI: 10.1080/20469047.2017.1409455 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Feb 2021This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the relationship between vancomycin (VCM) monitoring strategies and VCM effectiveness and safety. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the relationship between vancomycin (VCM) monitoring strategies and VCM effectiveness and safety.
METHODS
We conducted our analysis using the MEDLINE, Web of Sciences, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases searched on August 9, 2020. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Adult patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia with VCM trough concentrations ≥15 μg/mL had significantly lower treatment failure rates (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.85). The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) increased with increased trough concentrations and was significantly higher for trough concentrations ≥20 μg/mL compared to those at 15-20 μg/mL (OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.78-3.20). Analysis of the target area under the curve/minimum inhibitory concentration ratios (AUC/MIC) showed significantly lower treatment failure rates for high AUC/MIC (cut-off 400 ± 15%) (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.18-0.45). The safety analysis revealed that high AUC value (cut-off 600 ± 15%) significantly increased the risk of AKI (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.13-3.89). Our meta-analysis of differences in monitoring strategies included four studies. The incidence of AKI tended to be lower in AUC-guided monitoring than in trough-guided monitoring (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.28-1.01); however, it was not significant in the analysis of mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
We identified VCM trough concentrations and AUC values that correlated with effectiveness and safety. Furthermore, compared to trough-guided monitoring, AUC-guided monitoring showed potential for decreasing nephrotoxicity.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Area Under Curve; Bacteremia; Drug Monitoring; Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Odds Ratio; Safety; Staphylococcal Infections; Treatment Failure; Vancomycin
PubMed: 33549035
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-021-05858-6