No abstract

Multidrug-resistant, Gram-negative infection is a major global determinant of morbidity, mortality and cost of care. The advent of nanomedicine has enabled tailored engineering of macromolecular constructs, permitting increasingly selective targeting, alteration of volume of distribution and activity/toxicity. Macromolecules tend to passively and preferentially accumulate at sites of enhanced vascular permeability and are then retained. This enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect, whilst recognized as a major breakthrough in anti-tumoral targeting, has not yet been fully exploited in infection. Shared pathophysiological pathways in both cancer and infection are evident and a number of novel nanomedicines have shown promise in selective, passive, size-mediated targeting to infection. This review describes the similarities and parallels in pathophysiological pathways at molecular, cellular and circulatory levels between inflammation/infection and cancer therapy, where use of this principle has been established.

In the absence of robust randomized controlled trials on which the evidence may be based, this synthesis of current best evidence guides clinicians during the process of consenting patients and using leeches in their practice.

BackgroundGram negative infection is a major determinant of morbidity and survival. Traditional teaching suggests that burn wound infections in different centres are caused by differing sets of causative organisms. This study established whether Gram-negative burn wound isolates associated to clinical wound infection differ between burn centres.MethodsStudies investigating adult hospitalised patients (2000–2010) were critically appraised and qualified to a levels of evidence hierarchy. The contribution of bacterial pathogen type, and burn centre to the variance in standardised incidence of Gram-negative burn wound infection was analysed using two-way analysis of variance.Primary Findings Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumanni, Enterobacter spp., Proteus spp. and Escherichia coli emerged as the commonest Gram-negative burn wound pathogens. Individual pathogens’ incidence did not differ significantly between burn centres (F (4, 20) = 1.1, p = 0.3797; r2 = 9.84).InterpretationGram-negative infections predominate in burn surgery. This study is the first to establish that burn wound infections do not differ significantly between burn centres. It is the first study to report the pathogens responsible for the majority of Gram-negative infections in these patients. Whilst burn wound infection is not exclusive to these bacteria, it is hoped that reporting the presence of this group of common Gram-negative “target organisms” facilitate clinical practice and target research towards a defined clinical demand.