Ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) has been used as a frontline agent in the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacterial infections. However, the efficacy and safety of CAZ-AVI on carbapenem-resistant
Enterobacterales
(CRE) bloodstream infections (BSIs) remain unclear.
BackgroundThe benefits of intravenous immunoglobulin administration are controversial for critically ill COVID-19 patients.MethodsWe analyzed retrospectively the effects of immunoglobulin administration for critically ill COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity score was used to account for baseline confounders. Cluster analysis was used to perform phenotype analysis.ResultsBetween January 1 and February 29, 2020, 754 patients with complete data from 19 hospitals were enrolled. Death at 28 days occurred for 408 (54.1%) patients. There were 392 (52.0%) patients who received intravenous immunoglobulin, at 11 (interquartile range (IQR) 8, 16) days after illness onset; 30% of these patients received intravenous immunoglobulin prior to intensive care unit (ICU) admission. By unadjusted analysis, no difference was observed for 28-day mortality between the immunoglobulin and non-immunoglobulin groups. Similar results were found by propensity score matching (n = 506) and by IPTW analysis (n = 731). Also, IPTW analysis did not reveal any significant difference between hyperinflammation and hypoinflammation phenotypes.ConclusionNo significant association was observed for use of intravenous immunoglobulin and decreased mortality of severe COVID-19 patients. Phenotype analysis did not show any survival benefit for patients who received immunoglobulin therapy.
Background
Tissue oxygen saturation (StO2) decrease could appear earlier than lactate alteration. However, the correlation between StO2 and lactate clearance was unknown.
Methods
This was a prospective observational study. All consecutive patients with circulatory shock and lactate over 3 mmol/L were included. Based on the rule of nines, a BSA (body surface area) weighted StO2 was calculated from four sites of StO2 (masseter, deltoid, thenar and knee). The formulation was as follows: masseter StO2 × 9% + (deltoid StO2 + thenar StO2) × (18% + 27%)/ 2 + knee StO2 × 46%. Vital signs, blood lactate, arterial and central venous blood gas were measured simultaneously within 48 h of ICU admission. The predictive value of BSA-weighted StO2 on 6-hour lactate clearance > 10% since StO2 initially monitored was assessed.
Results
A total of 34 patients were included, of whom 19 (55.9%) had a lactate clearance higher than 10%. The mean SOFA score was lower in cLac ≥ 10% group compared with cLac < 10% group (11 ± 3 vs. 15 ± 4, p = 0.007). Other baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Compared to non-clearance group, StO2 in deltoid, thenar and knee were significantly higher in clearance group. The area under the receiver operating curves (AUROC) of BSA-weighted StO2 for prediction of lactate clearance (0.92, 95% CI [Confidence Interval] 0.82-1.00) was significantly higher than StO2 of masseter (0.65, 95% CI 0.45–0.84; p < 0.01), deltoid (0.77, 95% CI 0.60–0.94; p = 0.04), thenar (0.72, 95% CI 0.55–0.90; p = 0.01), and similar to knee (0.87, 0.73-1.00; p = 0.40), mean StO2 (0.85, 0.73–0.98; p = 0.09). Additionally, BSA-weighted StO2 model had continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI) over the knee StO2 and mean StO2 model (continuous NRI 48.1% and 90.2%, respectively). The AUROC of BSA-weighted StO2 was 0.91(95% CI 0.75-1.0) adjusted by mean arterial pressure and norepinephrine dose.
Conclusions
Our results suggested that BSA-weighted StO2 was a strong predictor of 6-hour lactate clearance in patients with shock.
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.