The treatment at the WWTP led to the relative enrichment of ESBLEC. We estimated that >600 billion of ESBLEC are released into the river Doubs daily and the sludge produced by the WWTP, used as fertilizer, contains 2.6 × 10(5) ESBLEC per gram.

The Pseudomonas aeruginosa-containing wastewater released by hospitals is treated by wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), generating sludge, which is used as a fertilizer, and effluent, which is discharged into rivers. We evaluated the risk of dissemination of antibiotic-resistant P. aeruginosa (AR-PA) from the hospital to the environment via the wastewater network. Over a 10-week period, we sampled weekly 11 points (hospital and urban wastewater, untreated and treated water, sludge) of the wastewater network and the river upstream and downstream of the WWTP of a city in eastern France. We quantified the P. aeruginosa load by colony counting. We determined the susceptibility to 16 antibiotics of 225 isolates, which we sorted into three categories (wild-type, antibiotic-resistant and multidrug-resistant). Extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) and metallo-β-lactamases (MBLs) were identified by gene sequencing. All non-wild-type isolates (n = 56) and a similar number of wild-type isolates (n = 54) were genotyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and multilocus sequence typing. Almost all the samples (105/110, 95.5%) contained P. aeruginosa, with high loads in hospital wastewater and sludge (≥3×106 CFU/l or/kg). Most of the multidrug-resistant isolates belonged to ST235, CC111 and ST395. They were found in hospital wastewater and some produced ESBLs such as PER-1 and MBLs such as IMP-29. The WWTP greatly reduced P. aeruginosa counts in effluent, but the P. aeruginosa load in the river was nonetheless higher downstream than upstream from the WWTP. We conclude that the antibiotic-resistant P. aeruginosa released by hospitals is found in the water downstream from the WWTP and in sludge, constituting a potential risk of environmental contamination.

(1) Background. Post-COVID-19 syndrome is defined as the persistence of symptoms after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. (2) Methods. ANOSVID is an observational retrospective study in Nord Franche-Comté Hospital in France that included adult COVID-19 patients confirmed by RT-PCR from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2020. The aim was to describe patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome with persistent symptoms (PS group) and to compare them with the patients without persistent symptoms (no-PS group). (3) Results. Of the 354 COVID-19 patients, 35.9% (n = 127) reported persistence of at least one symptom after a mean of 289.1 ± 24.5 days after symptom onset. Moreover, 115 patients reported a recurrence of symptoms after recovery, and only 12 patients reported continuous symptoms. The mean age of patients was 48.6 years (19–93) ± 19.4, and 81 patients (63.8%) were female. Patients in the PS group had a longer duration of symptoms of initial acute SARS-CoV-2 infection than patients in the no-PS group (respectively, 57.1 ± 82.1 days versus 29.7 ± 42.1 days, p < 0.001). A majority of patients (n = 104, 81.9%) reported three or more symptoms. The most prevalent persistent symptoms were loss of smell (74.0%, n = 94), fatigue (53.5%, n = 68), loss of taste (31.5%, n = 40), and dyspnea (30.7%, n = 39). These were followed by pain symptoms (26.8% (n = 34), 26.0% (n = 33), 24.4% (n = 31); headache, arthralgia, and myalgia, respectively). More than half of patients reporting persistent symptoms (58%, n = 73) were healthcare workers (HCWs). Among outpatients, this population was more present in the PS group than the no-PS group ((86.6%) n = 71/82 versus (72.2%) n = 109/151, p = 0.012). Post-COVID-19 syndrome was more frequent in patients with a past history of chronic rhinosinusitis (8.7% (n = 11%) versus 1.3% (n = 3), p < 0.001). No significant difference was found regarding clinical characteristics and outcome, laboratory, imaging findings, and treatment received in the two groups. (4) Conclusions. More than a third of our COVID-19 patients presented persistent symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly through loss of smell, loss of taste, fatigue, and dyspnea, with a high prevalence in HCWs among COVID-19 outpatients.

(1) Background: Leclercia adecarboxylata (L. adecarboxylata) is a gram-negative bacillus of the Enterobacteriaceae family, which is uncommonly isolated from clinical specimens. L. adecarboxylata is considered as an aquatic opportunistic pathogen and most of the human infections are polymicrobial and usually occur in immunocompromised hosts. (2) Methods: In this retrospective study, we included all L. adecarboxylata strains since the introduction of MALDI-TOF MS in the Microbiology Department of Nord Franche-Comté Hospital, France (from 1 March 2015 to 31 July 2019). We studied demographic characteristics, comorbidities, characteristics of the current infection and outcome as well as antimicrobial susceptibility testing in all isolates. (3) Results: A total of 8 samples were identified (in 6 patients (4M/2F), with a recurrent L. adecarboxylata infection in 2 patients). The patients’ mean age was 66.2 years (range: 19–84). All patients were considered as immunocompetent, except a peritoneal dialysis patient with kidney transplantation. An exposition to an aquatic environment was identified in one patient. The most prevalent clinical feature was catheter-associated male urinary tract infection (in 3 cases) followed by ventilator-associated pneumonia (in 2 cases). One of 6 patients presented L. adecarboxylata bacteremia. L. adecarboxylata was part of a polymicrobial infection in 4 patients. The isolates showed a high susceptibility to all tested antibiotics, except one strain, which was resistant to fosfomycin. All patients with L. adecarboxylata infection were treated with antibiotics with a favorable outcome. (4) Conclusion: This study confirms the pathogenicity of L. adecarboxylata, even in immunocompetent patients, with a high susceptibility to antibiotics.

Olfactory disorders (OD) pathogenesis, underlying conditions, and prognostic in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) remain partially described. ANOSVID is a retrospective study in Nord Franche‐Comté Hospital (France) that included COVID‐19 patients from March 1 2020 to May 31 2020. The aim was to compare COVID‐19 patients with OD (OD group) and patients without OD (no‐OD group). A second analysis compared patients with anosmia (high OD group) and patients with hyposmia or no OD (low or no‐OD group). The OD group presented less cardiovascular and other respiratory diseases compared to the no‐OD group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.536 [0.293–0.981], p = 0.041 and OR = 0.222 [0.056–0.874], p = 0.037 respectively). Moreover, history of malignancy was less present in the high OD group compared with the low or no‐OD group (OR = 0.170 [0.064–0.455], p < 0.001). The main associated symptoms (OR > 5) with OD were loss of taste (OR = 24.059 [13.474–42.959], p = 0.000) and cacosmia (OR = 5.821 [2.246–15.085], p < 0.001). Most of all ORs decreased in the second analysis, especially for general, digestive, and ENT symptoms. Only two ORs increased: headache (OR = 2.697 [1.746–4.167], p < 0.001) and facial pain (OR = 2.901 [1.441–5.842], p = 0.002). The high OD group had a higher creatinine clearance CKD than the low or no‐OD group (89.0 ± 21.1 vs. 81.0 ± 20.5, p = 0.040). No significant difference was found concerning the virological, radiological, and severity criteria. OD patients seem to have less comorbidity, especially better cardiovascular and renal function. Associated symptoms with OD were mostly neurological symptoms. We did not find a significant relationship between OD and less severity in COVID‐19 possibly due to methodological bias.

No abstract