HAART-associated hepatotoxicity correlates with liver histological stage in patients coinfected with HIV and HCV. There was no difference in hepatotoxicity risk for different antiretroviral therapies in patients with mild-to-moderate fibrosis.
Over an 8-year period (1995 to 2002), 86 Enterococcus faecium blood isolates from 84 patients, of which 54 were ampicillin resistant (AREF) and 32 were ampicillin susceptible (ASEF), were studied in a university hospital (1,200 beds; serving a population of 600,000) in Spain, a country characterized by a near-absence of resistance to vancomycin and very high rates of ampicillin resistance among enterococci. Clonal relatedness by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), antibiotic susceptibility, presence of the virulence/epidemicity genes esp Efm and hyl Efm , and identification of purK alleles were studied. A group of isolates was also analyzed by amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) and multilocus sequence typing. Medical charts (30 variables collected) were reviewed for 60/84 patients. ASEF showed high clonal diversity (32 PFGE types, 11 purK alleles, 4 AFLP genogroups), did not harbor putative virulence genes, and had no specific association with hospital acquisition. AREF isolates belonged to a clonal complex (CC) of genetically related strains (purK-1, AFLP genogroup C), occasionally harboring putative virulence traits, and were from patients with particular risk factors. Within this CC, previously associated with vancomycin-resistant E. faecium isolates causing outbreaks worldwide (W. L. Homan et al., J. Clin. Microbiol. 40:1963-1971, 2002), a great genetic diversity of antibiotic resistance and virulence/epidemicity profiles was found. Associations between esp and a >7-day hospital stay and between purK-1, hospital location, and nosocomial acquisition were noted (P < 0.001). These findings reflect the importance of local environmental differences in the evolution of this CC, suggesting that the emergence of vancomycin resistance among AREF strains in Spain may be a question of time.
Despite the increasing evidence of the benefit of corticosteroids for the treatment of moderate-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, no data are available about the potential role of high doses of steroids for these patients. We evaluated the mortality, the risk of need for mechanical ventilation (MV), or death and the risk of developing a severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between high (HD) and standard doses (SD) among patients with a severe COVID-19. All consecutive confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to a single center were selected, including those treated with steroids and an ARDS. Patients were allocated to the HD (≥ 250 mg/day of methylprednisolone) of corticosteroids or the SD (≤ 1.5 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone) at discretion of treating physician. Five hundred seventy-three patients were included: 428 (74.7%) men, with a median (IQR) age of 64 (54-73) years. In the HD group, a worse baseline respiratory situation was observed and male gender, older age, and comorbidities were significantly more common. After adjusting by baseline characteristics, HDs were associated with a higher mortality than SD (adjusted OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.59-3.81, p < 0.001) and with an increased risk of needing MV or death (adjusted OR 2.35, p = 0.001). Conversely, the risk of developing a severe ARDS was similar between groups. Interaction analysis showed that HD increased mortality exclusively in elderly patients. Our real-world experience advises against exceeding 1-1.5 mg/kg/day of corticosteroids for severe COVID-19 with an ARDS, especially in older subjects. This reinforces the rationale of modulating rather than suppressing immune responses in these patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.