Preventing invasive candida infections. Where could we do better?

Invasive candidiasis is associated with high mortality rates, ranging from 35% to 60%, in the range reported for septic shock. The epidemiology and pathogenesis of invasive candidiasis differ according to the patient's immune status; the majority of cases in immunocompromised hosts are candidaemia, whereas non-candidaemic systemic candidiasis accounts for the majority of cases in critically ill patients. In contrast to candidaemia, non-candidaemic systemic candidiasis is difficult to prove, especially in critically ill patients. Up to 80% of these patients are colonized, but only 5-30% develop invasive infection. The differentiation of colonization and proven infection is challenging, and evolution from the former to the latter requires seven to 10 days. This continuum from colonization of mucosal surfaces to local invasion and then invasive infection makes it difficult to identify those critically ill patients likely to benefit most from antifungal prophylaxis or early empirical antifungal treatment. Early empirical treatment of non-candidaemic systemic candidiasis currently relies on the positive predictive value of risk assessment strategies, such as the colonization index, candida score, and predictive rules based on combinations of risk factors such as candida colonization, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and abdominal surgery. Although guidelines recently scored these strategies as being supported by limited evidence, they are widely used at bedside and have substantially decreased the incidence of invasive candidiasis.

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.

Assessment of inflammatory Bowel Disease patient's needs and problems from a nursing perspective

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed at assessing Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients' needs and current nursing practice to investigate to what extent consensus statements (European Crohn's and Colitis Organization) on the nursing roles in caring for patients with IBD concur with local practice. METHODS: We used a mixed-method convergent design to combine quantitative data prospectively collected in the Swiss IBD cohort study and qualitative data from structured interviews with IBD healthcare experts. Symptoms, quality of life, and anxiety and depression scores were retrieved from physician charts and patient self-reported questionnaires. Descriptive analyses were performed based on quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: 230 patients of a single center were included, 60% of patients were males, and median age was 40 (range 18-85). The prevalence of abdominal pain was 42%. Self-reported data were obtained from 75 out of 230 patients. General health was perceived significantly lower compared with the general population (p < 0.001). Prevalence of tiredness was 73%; sleep problems, 78%; issues related to work, 20%; sexual constraints, 35%; diarrhea, 67%; being afraid of not finding a bathroom, 42%; depression, 11%; and anxiety symptoms, 23%. According to experts' interviews, the consensus statements are found mostly relevant with many recommendations that are not yet realized in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Identified prevalence may help clinicians in detecting patients at risk and improve patient management. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Réhabilitation améliorée après chirurgie--L'ere de la prise en charge optimale du patient chirurgical [Enhanced Recovery After Surgery--optimal management of the surgical patient].

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal, standardized and evidence-based perioperative care pathway. With ERAS, postoperative complications are significantly lowered, and, as a secondary effect, length of hospital stay and health cost are reduced. The patient recovers better and faster allowing to reduce in addition the workload of healthcare providers. Despite the hospital discharge occurs sooner, there is no increased charge of the outpatient care. ERAS can be safely applied to any patient by a tailored approach. The general practitioner plays an essential role in ERAS by assuring the continuity of the information and the follow-up of the patient.