β-Lactam Monotherapy vs β-Lactam-Macrolide Combination Treatment in Moderately Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The clinical benefit of adding a macrolide to a β-lactam for empirical treatment of moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To test noninferiority of a β-lactam alone compared with a β-lactam and macrolide combination in moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial conducted from January 13, 2009, through January 31, 2013, in 580 immunocompetent adult patients hospitalized in 6 acute care hospitals in Switzerland for moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. Follow-up extended to 90 days. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were treated with a β-lactam and a macrolide (combination arm) or with a β-lactam alone (monotherapy arm). Legionella pneumophila infection was systematically searched and treated by addition of a macrolide to the monotherapy arm. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of patients not reaching clinical stability (heart rate <100/min, systolic blood pressure >90 mm Hg, temperature <38.0°C, respiratory rate <24/min, and oxygen saturation >90% on room air) at day 7. RESULTS: After 7 days of treatment, 120 of 291 patients (41.2%) in the monotherapy arm vs 97 of 289 (33.6%) in the combination arm had not reached clinical stability (7.6% difference, P = .07). The upper limit of the 1-sided 90% CI was 13.0%, exceeding the predefined noninferiority boundary of 8%. Patients infected with atypical pathogens (hazard ratio [HR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.85) or with Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) category IV pneumonia (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.10) were less likely to reach clinical stability with monotherapy, whereas patients not infected with atypical pathogens (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.80-1.22) or with PSI category I to III pneumonia (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.82-1.36) had equivalent outcomes in the 2 arms. There were more 30-day readmissions in the monotherapy arm (7.9% vs 3.1%, P = .01). Mortality, intensive care unit admission, complications, length of stay, and recurrence of pneumonia within 90 days did not differ between the 2 arms. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We did not find noninferiority of β-lactam monotherapy in patients hospitalized for moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. Patients infected with atypical pathogens or with PSI category IV pneumonia had delayed clinical stability with monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00818610.

β-Lactam Monotherapy vs β-Lactam-Macrolide Combination Treatment in Moderately Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The clinical benefit of adding a macrolide to a β-lactam for empirical treatment of moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To test noninferiority of a β-lactam alone compared with a β-lactam and macrolide combination in moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial conducted from January 13, 2009, through January 31, 2013, in 580 immunocompetent adult patients hospitalized in 6 acute care hospitals in Switzerland for moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. Follow-up extended to 90 days. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were treated with a β-lactam and a macrolide (combination arm) or with a β-lactam alone (monotherapy arm). Legionella pneumophila infection was systematically searched and treated by addition of a macrolide to the monotherapy arm. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of patients not reaching clinical stability (heart rate <100/min, systolic blood pressure >90 mm Hg, temperature <38.0°C, respiratory rate <24/min, and oxygen saturation >90% on room air) at day 7. RESULTS: After 7 days of treatment, 120 of 291 patients (41.2%) in the monotherapy arm vs 97 of 289 (33.6%) in the combination arm had not reached clinical stability (7.6% difference, P = .07). The upper limit of the 1-sided 90% CI was 13.0%, exceeding the predefined noninferiority boundary of 8%. Patients infected with atypical pathogens (hazard ratio [HR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.85) or with Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) category IV pneumonia (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.10) were less likely to reach clinical stability with monotherapy, whereas patients not infected with atypical pathogens (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.80-1.22) or with PSI category I to III pneumonia (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.82-1.36) had equivalent outcomes in the 2 arms. There were more 30-day readmissions in the monotherapy arm (7.9% vs 3.1%, P = .01). Mortality, intensive care unit admission, complications, length of stay, and recurrence of pneumonia within 90 days did not differ between the 2 arms. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We did not find noninferiority of β-lactam monotherapy in patients hospitalized for moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. Patients infected with atypical pathogens or with PSI category IV pneumonia had delayed clinical stability with monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00818610.

Importation of Acinetobacter baumannii into a burn unit: a recurrent outbreak of infection associated with widespread environmental contamination.

A burn patient was infected with Acinetobacter baumannii on transfer to the hospital after a terrorist attack. Two patients experienced cross-infection. Environmental swab samples were negative for A. baumannii. Six months later, the bacteria reemerged in 6 patients. Environmental swab samples obtained at this time were inoculated into a minimal mineral broth, and culture results showed widespread contamination. No case of infection occurred after closure of the unit for disinfection.

CD14 expression on monocytes and TNF alpha production in patients with septic shock, cardiogenic shock or bacterial pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with septic shock, circulating monocytes become refractory to stimulation with microbial products. Whether this hyporesponsive state is induced by infection or is related to shock is unknown. To address this question, we measured TNF alpha production by monocytes or by whole blood obtained from healthy volunteers (controls), from patients with septic shock, from patients with severe infection (bacterial pneumonia) without shock, and from patients with cardiogenic shock without infection. MEASUREMENTS: The numbers of circulating monocytes, of CD14+ monocytes, and the expression of monocyte CD14 and the LPS receptor, were assessed by flow cytometry. Monocytes or whole blood were stimulated with lipopolysaccharide endotoxin (LPS), heat-killed Escherichia coli or Staphylococcus aureus, and TNF alpha production was measured by bioassay. RESULTS: The number of circulating monocytes, of CD14+ monocytes, and the monocyte CD14 expression were significantly lower in patients with septic shock than in controls, in patients with bacterial pneumonia or in those with cardiogenic shock (p < 0.001). Monocytes or whole blood of patients with septic shock exhibited a profound deficiency of TNF alpha production in response to all stimuli (p < 0.05 compared to controls). Whole blood of patients with cardiogenic shock also exhibited this defect (p < 0.05 compared to controls), although to a lesser extent, despite normal monocyte counts and normal CD14 expression. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike patients with bacterial pneumonia, patients with septic or cardiogenic shock display profoundly defective TNF alpha production in response to a broad range of infectious stimuli. Thus, down-regulation of cytokine production appears to occur in patients with systemic, but not localised, albeit severe, infections and also in patients with non-infectious circulatory failure. Whilst depletion of monocytes and reduced monocyte CD14 expression are likely to be critical components of the hyporesponsiveness observed in patients with septic shock, other as yet unidentified factors are at work in this group and in patients with cardiogenic shock.

Head-to-head comparison of length of stay, patients' outcome and satisfaction in Switzerland before and after SwissDRG-Implementation in 2012 in 2012: an observational study in two tertiary university centers.

On 1 January 2012 Swiss Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG), a new uniform payment system for in-patients was introduced in Switzerland with the intention to replace a "cost-based" with a "case-based" reimbursement system to increase efficiency. With the introduction of the new payment system we aim to answer questions raised regarding length of stay as well as patients' outcome and satisfaction. This is a prospective, two-centre observational cohort study with data from University Hospital Basel and the Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Switzerland, from January to June 2011 and 2012, respectively. Consecutive in-patients with the main diagnosis of either community-acquired pneumonia, exacerbation of COPD, acute heart failure or hip fracture were included. A questionnaire survey was sent out after discharge investigating changes before and after SwissDRG implementation. Our primary endpoint was LOS. Of 1,983 eligible patients 841 returned the questionnaire and were included into the analysis (429 in 2011, 412 in 2012). The median age was 76.7 years (50.8% male). Patients in the two years were well balanced in regard to main diagnoses and co-morbidities. Mean LOS in the overall patient population was 10.0 days and comparable between the 2011 cohort and the 2012 cohort (9.7 vs 10.3; p = 0.43). Overall satisfaction with care changed only slightly after introduction of SwissDRG and remained high (89.0% vs 87.8%; p = 0.429). Investigating the influence of the implementation of SwissDRG in 2012 regarding LOS patients' outcome and satisfaction, we found no significant changes. However, we observed some noteworthy trends, which should be monitored closely.

Changing molecular epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an Algerian hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major cause of both hospital- and community-acquired infections worldwide. However, data about the molecular epidemiology of MRSA in North Africa are still scarce. METHODOLOGY: All MRSA isolates recovered between January 2006 and July 2011 from one Algerian hospital were genetically and phenotypically characterized. RESULTS: The predominance of a European community-associated-MRSA (CA-MRSA) clone (ST80-SCCmec IV-PVL positive) was revealed by this analysis. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a CA-MRSA clone recently invaded the hospital setting in Algiers and replaced a typical hospital-associated pandemic clone such as the Brazilian clone (ST239-SCCmec IIImercury-PVL negative).

Diagnostic microbiologique de la pneumonie [Microbiological diagnosis of pneumonia].

Les pneumonies causent une mortalité et une morbidité significatives. De manière simplifiée, deux types de pneumonie sont décrits : la pneumonie communautaire et la pneumonie nosocomiale avec le pneumocoque et l'Haemophilus influenzae comme causes principales pour la première, le Pseudomonas et diverses entérobactéries pour la deuxième. La réalité est cependant plus complexe puisque l'on distingue aussi la pneumonie d'aspiration par exemple. La culture est très importante dans le cas des pneumonies nosocomiales car elle permet de déterminer la sensibilité aux antibiotiques de l'agent infectieux et d'adapter le traitement. Pour les patients immunosupprimés, le diagnostic différentiel est plus large et la recherche par tests moléculaires de certains virus, de champignons filamenteux et du Pneumocystis peut se révéler informative. Pneumonia is an importance cause of mortality and morbidity in adults. Two types of pneumonia are defined: community-acquired and nosocomial pneumonia with their corresponding etiology such as pneumococci or Haemophilus influenzae and Pseudomonas or enterobacteriaceae, respectively. However, the reality is more complex with aspiration pneumonia, pneumonia in immunocompromised patient, and pneumonia in ventilated patients. Culture in the case of nosocomial pneumonia is especially important to obtain the antibiotic susceptibility of the infectious agent and to adjust therapy. Moreover for immunocompromised patients, the differential diagnosis is much wider looking for viruses, filamentous fungi and Pneumocystis can be very informative, using new molecular assays.