Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid+aminoglycoside as empirical antibiotic treatment in severe community-acquired infections with diagnostic uncertainty

Diagnostic uncertainty in infectious diseases: Advocacy for a nosological framework

Diagnostic uncertainty (DU) is frequent in infectious diseases (ID), being recorded in 10% to over 50% of patients. Herein, we show that in several fields of clinical practice, high rates of DU are constant over time. DUs are not taken into account in guidelines, as therapeutic propositions are based on an established diagnosis. Moreover, while other guidelines underline the need for rapid broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy for patients with sepsis, many clinical conditions mimic sepsis and lead to unnecessary antibiotic therapy. Considering DU, many studies have been carried out to look for relevant biomarkers of infections, which also attest to non-infectious diseases mimicking infections. Therefore, diagnosis is often primarily a hypothesis, and empirical antibiotic therapy should be reassessed when microbiological data are available. However, other than for urinary tract infections or unexpected primary bacteremia, the high frequency of sterile microbiological samples implies that DU remains central in follow-up, which does not facilitate clinical management or antibiotic optimization. The main way to resolve the therapeutic challenge of DU could be to precisely describe the latter through a consensual definition that would facilitate consideration of DU and its mandatory therapeutic implications. A consensual definition of DU would also clarify responsibility and accountability for physicians in the antimicrobial approval process and l provide an opportunity to instruct their students in this large field of medical practices and to productively conduct relevant research.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Research Opportunities for Infection and Blood Purification Therapies

Patients with infection can develop sepsis, and their mortality can be high. An important aspect in the treatment of sepsis is adequate management of the infection.

Urinary tract infection and antibiotic use around ureteral stent insertion for urolithiasis

Urolithiasis is the main indication for a ureteral JJ stent. Our aim was to determine the incidence of urinary tract infections (UTIs) after a JJ stent for urolithiasis, with an emphasis on antibiotic use. Prospective, multicenter, cohort study over a 4-month period including all of the patients with urolithiasis requiring JJ stent insertion. The clinical and microbiological data and therapeutic information were recorded until removal of the JJ stent. Two hundred twenty-three patients at five French private hospitals were included. A urine culture was performed for 187 patients (84%) prior to insertion of a JJ stent, 36 (19%) of which were positive. One hundred thirty patients (58%) received an antibiotic therapy during surgery: 74 (33%) prophylaxis and 56 (25%) empirical antibiotic therapy, comprising 17 different regimens. The rate of prophylaxis varied according to the center, from 0 to 70%. A total of 208 patients were followed-up until removal of the first stent. The rate of UTIs was 6.3% (13/208); 8.1% of the patients who did not receive a prophylaxis had a UTI versus 1.4% of those who did receive a prophylaxis (p = 0.057). Seven empirical antibiotic regimens were used to treat these 13 patients. Another large panel of antibiotic prescriptions was observed at the time of JJ stent removal. The incidence of a UTI after JJ stent insertion for urolithiasis was 6.3%, in part due to a lack of prophylaxis. An unwarranted diversity of antibiotic use was observed at each step of care.