The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, collection, management, analysis,

Twelve-hour PP is a safe procedure and allows a continuous oxygenation improvement throughout the entire session.

Ceftazidime and amikacin were administered in a Pseudomonas aeruginosa rabbit endocarditis model using computer-controlled intravenous (iv) infusion pumps to simulate human serum concentrations for the following regimens: continuous (constant rate) infusion of 4, 6 or 8 g of ceftazidime over 24 h or intermittent dosing of 2 g every 8 h either alone or in combination with amikacin (15 mg/kg once daily). The in vivo activities of these regimens were tested on four Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. Animals were killed 24 h after the beginning of treatment. Efficacy was assessed by comparing the effects of the different groups on bacterial counts in vegetations for each strain tested. For a susceptible reference strain (ATCC 27853; MICs of ceftazidime and amikacin 1 and 2 mg/L, respectively), continuous infusion of 4 g alone or with amikacin was as effective as intermittent dosing with amikacin. For a clinical isolate producing an oxacillinase (MICs of ceftazidime and amikacin 8 and 32 mg/L, respectively), continuous infusion of 6 g was equivalent to intermittent dosing. For a clinical isolate producing a TEM-2 penicillinase (MIC of ceftazidime and amikacin 4 mg/L), continuous infusion of 6 g, but not intermittent dosing, had a significant in vivo effect. For a clinical isolate producing an inducible, chromosomally encoded cephalosporinase (MIC of ceftazidime and amikacin 8 and 4 mg/L, respectively), neither continuous infusion nor intermittent dosing proved effective. Determination of ceftazidime concentrations in vegetations showed that continuous infusion produced tissue concentrations at the infection site far greater than the MIC throughout the treatment. It is concluded that continuous infusion of the same total daily dose provides significant activity as compared with fractionated infusion. This study confirms that a concentration of 4-5 x MIC is a reasonable therapeutic target in most clinical settings of severe P. aeruginosa infection.

Rational To evaluate the respective impact of standard oxygen, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on oxygenation failure rate and mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Methods Multicenter, prospective cohort study (COVID-ICU) in 137 hospitals in France, Belgium, and Switzerland. Demographic, clinical, respiratory support, oxygenation failure, and survival data were collected. Oxygenation failure was defined as either intubation or death in the ICU without intubation. Variables independently associated with oxygenation failure and Day-90 mortality were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Results From February 25 to May 4, 2020, 4754 patients were admitted in ICU. Of these, 1491 patients were not intubated on the day of ICU admission and received standard oxygen therapy (51%), HFNC (38%), or NIV (11%) (P < 0.001). Oxygenation failure occurred in 739 (50%) patients (678 intubation and 61 death). For standard oxygen, HFNC, and NIV, oxygenation failure rate was 49%, 48%, and 60% (P < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, HFNC (odds ratio [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36–0.99, P = 0.013) but not NIV (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.78–3.21) was associated with a reduction in oxygenation failure). Overall 90-day mortality was 21%. By multivariable analysis, HFNC was not associated with a change in mortality (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61–1.33), while NIV was associated with increased mortality (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.79–4.21, P < 0.001). Conclusion In patients with COVID-19, HFNC was associated with a reduction in oxygenation failure without improvement in 90-day mortality, whereas NIV was associated with a higher mortality in these patients. Randomized controlled trials are needed.

Background Patients infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV 2) and requiring intensive care unit (ICU) have a high incidence of hospital-acquired infections; however, data regarding hospital acquired bloodstream infections (BSI) are scarce. We aimed to investigate risk factors and outcome of BSI in critically ill coronavirus infectious disease-19 (COVID-19) patients. Patients and methods We performed an ancillary analysis of a multicenter prospective international cohort study (COVID-ICU study) that included 4010 COVID-19 ICU patients. For the present analysis, only those with data regarding primary outcome (death within 90 days from admission) or BSI status were included. Risk factors for BSI were analyzed using Fine and Gray competing risk model. Then, for outcome comparison, 537 BSI-patients were matched with 537 controls using propensity score matching. Results Among 4010 included patients, 780 (19.5%) acquired a total of 1066 BSI (10.3 BSI per 1000 patients days at risk) of whom 92% were acquired in the ICU. Higher SAPS II, male gender, longer time from hospital to ICU admission and antiviral drug before admission were independently associated with an increased risk of BSI, and interestingly, this risk decreased over time. BSI was independently associated with a shorter time to death in the overall population (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.28, 95% CI 1.05–1.56) and, in the propensity score matched data set, patients with BSI had a higher mortality rate (39% vs 33% p = 0.036). BSI accounted for 3.6% of the death of the overall population. Conclusion COVID-19 ICU patients have a high risk of BSI, especially early after ICU admission, risk that increases with severity but not with corticosteroids use. BSI is associated with an increased mortality rate.