Cefuroxime prophylaxis is effective in noninstrumented spine surgery : a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Rapport de synthèse : Plusieurs investigateurs ont démontré que l'utilisation d'une antibiothérapie prophylactique lors d'interventions neurochirurgicales en terrain non infecté (chirurgie propre) réduisait le taux d'infection. Toutefois, ces taux d'infections sont très variables en fonction des types de chirurgie et de la durée des interventions. Les craniotomies, la mise en place ou le remplacement de shunt ventriculo-cardiaque, l'extirpation de méningiomes intracrâniens et les interventions d'une durée de plus de quatre heures sont grevées d'un taux d'infections post-opératoires plus élevé. Si une prophylaxie antibiotique est maintenant reconnue et utilisée dans ce type de chirurgie, il n'a jamais été démontré que cette pratique amène un bénéfice dans les cas de chirurgie pour hernie discale. Des études ont montré que de nombreux organismes potentiellement pathogènes pouvaient être collectés et cultivés à proximité voire dans le champ opératoire. Malgré ces observations, le taux d'infections post-opératoires reste peu important (entre 1-4% selon les centres). Il n'est actuellement pas possible de distinguer le rôle respectif d'une antibiothérapie prophylactique et des pratiques d'asepsie habituelles (y compris l'usage de solutions de rinçage antiseptiques) dans la faible incidence des infections post-opératoires en ce qui concerne la chirurgie des hernies discales. Lorsque des opérations de chirurgie dite «propre » sont grevées d'un taux de complications aussi bas, une prophylaxie antibiotique n'est généralement pas recommandée, en raison d'un rapport coût-bénéfice défavorable. Le but de cette étude est d'évaluer la nécessité d'une antibiothérapie prophylactique par une céphalosporine de seconde génération (cefuroxime 1,5 g intraveineuse) dans la prévention des infections post-opératoires au cours d'une chirurgie pour hernie discale. Il s'agit d'un essai clinique prospectif, contrôlé contre placebo en insu réciproque, à répartition aléatoire. L'étude a été conduite dans les services de neurochirurgie de l'Hôpital Universitaire de Genève et du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois de Lausanne. L'ensemble des patients admis dans ces deux services pour une opération de hernie discale et ayant donné leur consentement ont été inclus dans l'étude qui s'est déroulé sur une période de 6 ans. Mille trois cent soixante-neuf patients opérés pour une hernie discale ont été inclus dans cet essai et 132 patients ont été exclus de l'analyse pour diverses raisons. Au total 1'237 patients ont été analysés, respectivement 613 et 624 patients dans le groupe cefuroxime et le groupe placebo. Les patients des deux groupes présentaient des caractéristiques identiques. Nous n'avons objectivé aucun effet secondaire indésirable attribuable à la cefuroxime ou au placebo. Huit (1.3%) patients du groupe cefuroxime et 18 patients (2.8%) du groupe placebo ont développé une infection du site opératoire (P=0.073). Neuf des patients infectés dans le groupe placebo présentaient une infection profonde du site opératoire (spondylodiscite, abcès épidural) et aucun dans le groupe cefuroxime (P<0.01). Tous les patients avec infection profonde du site opératoire ont été traités par antibiothérapie par voie intraveineuse pour au moins 4 semaines et il a été procédé à une reprise chirurgicale chez deux patients. Ces résultats montrent qu'il faut traiter 69 patients avec une antibiothérapie prophylactique de cefuroxime pour prévenir une infection du site opératoire. En conclusion, l'administration d'une dose de cefuroxime 1.5 g intraveineuse comme prophylaxie lors d'opération de hernie discale, permet de réduire significativement le risque d'infection profonde du site opératoire.

Vaccines safety; effect of supervision or SMS on reporting rates of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with meningitis vaccine (MenAfriVac?): a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To ensure vaccines safety, given the weaknesses of the national pharmacovigilance system in Cameroon, there is a need to identify effective interventions that can contribute to improving AEFI reporting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of: (i) sending weekly SMS, or (ii) weekly supervisory visits on AEFI reporting rate during a meningitis immunization campaign conducted in Cameroon in 2012 using the meningitis A conjugate vaccine (MenAfriVac?). METHODS: Health facilities that met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to receive: (i) a weekly standardized SMS, (ii) a weekly standardized supervisory visits or (iii) no intervention. The primary outcome was the reported AEFI incidence rate from week 5 to 8 after the immunization campaign. Poisson regression model was used to estimate the effect of interventions after adjusting for health region, type of health facility, type and position of health workers as well as the cumulative number of AEFI reported from weeks 1 to 4. RESULTS: A total of 348 (77.2%) of 451 health facility were included, and 116 assigned to each of three groups. The incidence rate of reported AEFI per 100 health facility per week was 20.0 (15.9-24.1) in the SMS group, 40.2 (34.4-46.0) in supervision group and 13.6 (10.1-16.9) in the control group. Supervision led to a significant increase of AEFI reporting rate compared to SMS [adjusted RR=2.1 (1.6-2.7); p<0.001] and control [RR=2.8(2.1-3.7); p<0.001)] groups. The effect of SMS led to some increase in AEFI reporting rate compared to the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant [RR=1.4(0.8-1.6); p=0.07)]. CONCLUSION: Supervision was more effective than SMS or routine surveillance in improving AEFI reporting rate. It should be part of any AEFI surveillance system. SMS could be useful in improving AEFI reporting rates but strategies need to be found to improve its effectiveness, and thus maximize its benefits.

Optimisation of energy provision with supplemental parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Enteral nutrition (EN) is recommended for patients in the intensive-care unit (ICU), but it does not consistently achieve nutritional goals. We assessed whether delivery of 100% of the energy target from days 4 to 8 in the ICU with EN plus supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) could optimise clinical outcome. METHODS: This randomised controlled trial was undertaken in two centres in Switzerland. We enrolled patients on day 3 of admission to the ICU who had received less than 60% of their energy target from EN, were expected to stay for longer than 5 days, and to survive for longer than 7 days. We calculated energy targets with indirect calorimetry on day 3, or if not possible, set targets as 25 and 30 kcal per kg of ideal bodyweight a day for women and men, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive EN or SPN. The primary outcome was occurrence of nosocomial infection after cessation of intervention (day 8), measured until end of follow-up (day 28), analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00802503. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 153 patients to SPN and 152 to EN. 30 patients discontinued before the study end. Mean energy delivery between day 4 and 8 was 28 kcal/kg per day (SD 5) for the SPN group (103% [SD 18%] of energy target), compared with 20 kcal/kg per day (7) for the EN group (77% [27%]). Between days 9 and 28, 41 (27%) of 153 patients in the SPN group had a nosocomial infection compared with 58 (38%) of 152 patients in the EN group (hazard ratio 0·65, 95% CI 0·43-0·97; p=0·0338), and the SPN group had a lower mean number of nosocomial infections per patient (-0·42 [-0·79 to -0·05]; p=0·0248). INTERPRETATION: Individually optimised energy supplementation with SPN starting 4 days after ICU admission could reduce nosocomial infections and should be considered as a strategy to improve clinical outcome in patients in the ICU for whom EN is insufficient. FUNDING: Foundation Nutrition 2000Plus, ICU Quality Funds, Baxter, and Fresenius Kabi.

Working alliance in communication skills training for oncology clinicians: A controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of communication skills training (CST) on working alliance and to identify specific communicational elements related to working alliance. METHODS: Pre- and post-training simulated patient interviews (6-month interval) of oncology physicians and nurses (N=56) who benefited from CST were compared to two simulated patient interviews with a 6-month interval of oncology physicians and nurses (N=57) who did not benefit from CST. The patient-clinician interaction was analyzed by means of the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Alliance was measured by the Working Alliance Inventory - Short Revised Form. RESULTS: While working alliance did not improve with CST, generalized linear mixed effect models demonstrated that the quality of verbal communication was related to alliance. Positive talk and psychosocial counseling fostered alliance whereas negative talk, biomedical information and patient's questions diminished alliance. CONCLUSION: Patient-clinician alliance is related to specific verbal communication behaviors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Working alliance is a key element of patient-physician communication which deserves further investigation as a new marker and efficacy criterion of CST outcome.

A prospective, randomized, and controlled study of fluid management in children with severe head injury: lactated Ringer's solution versus hypertonic saline.

OBJECTIVES: Resuscitation in severe head injury may be detrimental when given with hypotonic fluids. We evaluated the effects of lactated Ringer's solution (sodium 131 mmol/L, 277 mOsm/L) compared with hypertonic saline (sodium 268 mmol/L, 598 mOsm/L) in severely head-injured children over the first 3 days after injury. DESIGN: An open, randomized, and prospective study. SETTING: A 16-bed pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) (level III) at a university children's hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 35 consecutive children with head injury. INTERVENTIONS: Thirty-two children with Glasgow Coma Scores of <8 were randomly assigned to receive either lactated Ringer's solution (group 1) or hypertonic saline (group 2). Routine care was standardized, and included the following: head positioning at 30 degrees; normothermia (96.8 degrees to 98.6 degrees F [36 degrees to 37 degrees C]); analgesia and sedation with morphine (10 to 30 microg/kg/hr), midazolam (0.2 to 0.3 mg/kg/hr), and phenobarbital; volume-controlled ventilation (PaCO2 of 26.3 to 30 torr [3.5 to 4 kPa]); and optimal oxygenation (PaO2 of 90 to 105 torr [12 to 14 kPa], oxygen saturation of >92%, and hematocrit of >0.30). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean arterial pressure and intracranial pressure (ICP) were monitored continuously and documented hourly and at every intervention. The means of every 4-hr period were calculated and serum sodium concentrations were measured at the same time. An ICP of 15 mm Hg was treated with a predefined sequence of interventions, and complications were documented. There was no difference with respect to age, male/female ratio, or initial Glasgow Coma Score. In both groups, there was an inverse correlation between serum sodium concentration and ICP (group 1: r = -.13, r2 = .02, p < .03; group 2: r = -.29, r2 = .08, p < .001) that disappeared in group 1 and increased in group 2 (group 1: r = -.08, r2 = .01, NS; group 2: r = -.35, r2 =.12, p < .001). Correlation between serum sodium concentration and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) became significant in group 2 after 8 hrs of treatment (r = .2, r2 = .04, p = .002). Over time, ICP and CPP did not significantly differ between the groups. However, to keep ICP at <15 mm Hg, group 2 patients required significantly fewer interventions (p < .02). Group 1 patients received less sodium (8.0 +/- 4.5 vs. 11.5 +/- 5.0 mmol/kg/day, p = .05) and more fluid on day 1 (2850 +/- 1480 vs. 2180 +/- 770 mL/m2, p = .05). They also had a higher frequency of acute respiratory distress syndrome (four vs. 0 patients, p = .1) and more than two complications (six vs. 1 patient, p = .09). Group 2 patients had significantly shorter ICU stay times (11.6 +/- 6.1 vs. 8.0 +/- 2.4 days; p = .04) and shorter mechanical ventilation times (9.5 +/- 6.0 vs. 6.9 +/- 2.2 days; p = .1). The survival rate and duration of hospital stay were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of severe head injury with hypertonic saline is superior to that treatment with lactated Ringer's solution. An increase in serum sodium concentrations significantly correlates with lower ICP and higher CPP. Children treated with hypertonic saline require fewer interventions, have fewer complications, and stay a shorter time in the ICU.

A pilot feasibility, safety and biological efficacy multicentre trial of therapeutic hypercapnia after cardiac arrest: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest causes ischaemic brain injury. Arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) is a major determinant of cerebral blood flow. Thus, mild hypercapnia in the 24 h following cardiac arrest may increase cerebral blood flow and attenuate such injury. We describe the Carbon Control and Cardiac Arrest (CCC) trial. METHODS/DESIGN: The CCC trial is a pilot multicentre feasibility, safety and biological efficacy randomized controlled trial recruiting adult cardiac arrest patients admitted to the intensive care unit after return of spontaneous circulation. At admission, using concealed allocation, participants are randomized to 24 h of either normocapnia (PaCO2 35 to 45 mmHg) or mild hypercapnia (PaCO2 50 to 55 mmHg). Key feasibility outcomes are recruitment rate and protocol compliance rate. The primary biological efficacy and biological safety measures are the between-groups difference in serum neuron-specific enolase and S100b protein levels at 24 h, 48 h and 72 h. Secondary outcome measure include adverse events, in-hospital mortality, and neurological assessment at 6 months. DISCUSSION: The trial commenced in December 2012 and, when completed, will provide clinical evidence as to whether targeting mild hypercapnia for 24 h following intensive care unit admission for cardiac arrest patients is feasible and safe and whether it results in decreased concentrations of neurological injury biomarkers compared with normocapnia. Trial results will also be used to determine whether a phase IIb study powered for survival at 90 days is feasible and justified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612000690853 .

Randomized clinical trial on epidural versus patient-controlled analgesia for laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway.

OBJECTIVE: To compare epidural analgesia (EDA) to patient-controlled opioid-based analgesia (PCA) in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. BACKGROUND: EDA is mainstay of multimodal pain management within enhanced recovery pathways [enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)]. For laparoscopic colorectal resections, the benefit of epidurals remains debated. Some consider EDA as useful, whereas others perceive epidurals as unnecessary or even deleterious. METHODS: A total of 128 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resections were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial comparing EDA versus PCA. Primary end point was medical recovery. Overall complications, hospital stay, perioperative vasopressor requirements, and postoperative pain scores were secondary outcome measures. Analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Final analysis included 65 EDA patients and 57 PCA patients. Both groups were similar regarding baseline characteristics. Medical recovery required a median of 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3-7.5 days) in EDA patients and 4 days (IQR, 3-6 days) in the PCA group (P = 0.082). PCA patients had significantly less overall complications [19 (33%) vs 35 (54%); P = 0.029] but a similar hospital stay [5 days (IQR, 4-8 days) vs 7 days (IQR, 4.5-12 days); P = 0.434]. Significantly more EDA patients needed vasopressor treatment perioperatively (90% vs 74%, P = 0.018), the day of surgery (27% vs 4%, P < 0.001), and on postoperative day 1 (29% vs 4%, P < 0.001), whereas no difference in postoperative pain scores was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Epidurals seem to slow down recovery after laparoscopic colorectal resections without adding obvious benefits. EDA can therefore not be recommended as part of ERAS pathways in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Effect Estimation of an Innovative Nursing Intervention to Improve Delirium among Home-Dwelling Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.

AIMS: Estimating the effect of a nursing intervention in home-dwelling older adults on the occurrence and course of delirium and concomitant cognitive and functional impairment. METHODS: A randomized clinical pilot trial using a before/after design was conducted with older patients discharged from hospital who had a medical prescription to receive home care. A total of 51 patients were randomized into the experimental group (EG) and 52 patients into the control group (CG). Besides usual home care, nursing interventions were offered by a geriatric nurse specialist to the EG at 48 h, 72 h, 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days after discharge. All patients were monitored for symptoms of delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method. Cognitive and functional statuses were measured with the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Katz and Lawton Index. RESULTS: No statistical differences with regard to symptoms of delirium (p = 0.085), cognitive impairment (p = 0.151), and functional status (p = 0.235) were found between the EG and CG at study entry and at 1 month. After adjustment, statistical differences were found in favor of the EG for symptoms of delirium (p = 0.046), cognitive impairment (p = 0.015), and functional status (p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Nursing interventions to detect delirium at home are feasible and accepted. The nursing interventions produced a promising effect to improve delirium.

Frequent users of the emergency department in a universal health coverage system : a randomized controlled trial of a case-management intervention

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department users represent a small number of patients but account for a large number of emergency department visits. They should be a focus because they are often vulnerable patients with many risk factors affecting their quality of life (QoL). Case management interventions have resulted in a significant decrease in emergency department visits, but association with QoL has not been assessed. One aim of our study was to examine to what extent an interdisciplinary case management intervention, compared to standard emergency care, improved frequent emergency department users' QoL. METHODS: Data are part of a randomized, controlled trial designed to improve frequent emergency department users' QoL and use of health-care resources at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. In total, 250 frequent emergency department users (≥5 attendances during the previous 12 months; ≥ 18 years of age) were interviewed between May 2012 and July 2013. Following an assessment focused on social characteristics; social, mental, and somatic determinants of health; risk behaviors; health care use; and QoL, participants were randomly assigned to the control or the intervention group (n=125 in each group). The final sample included 194 participants (20 deaths, 36 dropouts, n=96 in the intervention group, n=99 in the control group). Participants in the intervention group received a case management intervention by an interdisciplinary, mobile team in addition to standard emergency care. The case management intervention involved four nurses and a physician who provided counseling and assistance concerning social determinants of health, substance-use disorders, and access to the health-care system. The participants' QoL was evaluated by a study nurse using the WHOQOL-BREF five times during the study (at baseline, and at 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months). Four of the six WHOQOL dimensions of QoL were retained here: physical health, psychological health, social relationship, and environment, with scores ranging from 0 (low QoL) to 100 (high QoL). A linear, mixed-effects model with participants as a random effect was run to analyze the change in QoL over time. The effects of time, participants' group, and the interaction between time and group were tested. These effects were controlled for sociodemographic characteristics and health-related variables (i.e., age, gender, education, citizenship, marital status, type of financial resources, proficiency in French, somatic and mental health problems, and behaviors at risk).

Impact of case management on frequent users quality of life : a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department users represent a small number of patients but account for a large number of emergency department visits. They should be a focus because they are often vulnerable patients with many risk factors affecting their quality of life (QoL). Case management interventions have resulted in a significant decrease in emergency department visits, but association with QoL has not been assessed. One aim of our study was to examine to what extent an interdisciplinary case management intervention, compared to standard emergency care, improved frequent emergency department users' QoL. METHODS: Data are part of a randomized, controlled trial designed to improve frequent emergency department users' QoL and use of health-care resources at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. In total, 250 frequent emergency department users (≥5 attendances during the previous 12 months; ≥ 18 years of age) were interviewed between May 2012 and July 2013. Following an assessment focused on social characteristics; social, mental, and somatic determinants of health; risk behaviors; health care use; and QoL, participants were randomly assigned to the control or the intervention group (n=125 in each group). The final sample included 194 participants (20 deaths, 36 dropouts, n=96 in the intervention group, n=99 in the control group). Participants in the intervention group received a case management intervention by an interdisciplinary, mobile team in addition to standard emergency care. The case management intervention involved four nurses and a physician who provided counseling and assistance concerning social determinants of health, substance-use disorders, and access to the health-care system.

Fulvestrant with or without selumetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor, in breast cancer progressing after aromatase inhibitor therapy: A multicentre randomised placebo-controlled double-blind phase II trial, SAKK 21/08.

BACKGROUND: Second line endocrine therapy has limited antitumour activity. Fulvestrant inhibits and downregulates the oestrogen receptor. The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is one of the major cascades involved in resistance to endocrine therapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of fulvestrant with selumetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor, in advanced stage breast cancer progressing after aromatase inhibitor (AI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomised phase II trial included postmenopausal patients with endocrine-sensitive breast cancer. They were ramdomised to fulvestrant combined with selumetinib or placebo. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) in the experimental arm. ClinicalTrials.gov Indentifier: NCT01160718. RESULTS: Following the planned interim efficacy analysis, recruitment was interrupted after the inclusion of 46 patients (23 in each arm), because the selumetinib-fulvestrant arm did not reach the pre-specified DCR. DCR was 23% (95% confidence interval (CI) 8-45%) in the selumetinib arm and 50% (95% CI 27-75%) in the placebo arm. Median progression-free survival was 3.7months (95% CI 1.9-5.8) in the selumetinib arm and 5.6months (95% CI 3.4-13.6) in the placebo arm. Median time to treatment failure was 5.1 (95% CI 2.3-6.7) and 5.6 (95% CI 3.4-10.2) months, respectively. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events observed in the selumetinib-fulvestrant arm were skin disorders, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, oedema, diarrhoea, mouth disorders and muscle disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of selumetinib to fulvestrant did not show improving patients' outcome and was poorly tolerated at the recommended monotherapy dose. Selumetinib may have deteriorated the efficacy of the endocrine therapy in some patients.