My patient with ulcerative colitis has had colectomy. Can she still get C. difficile infection?

Yes! Although a common cause of colitis, an increasing number of reports in the literature suggest C. difficile can cause enteritis as well.Antibiotic use is a major risk factor in most reports, with nearly one-half of the cases reported in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, many post-colectomy. 1-3

Mortality of C. difficile enteritis based on the first 83 cases in the literature appears to be 23%,1 but as high as 60%-83% depending on the report!2 Its diagnosis post-colectomy requires a high index of suspicion, as patients may not complain of “diarrhea” with chronically loose stools in the ileostomy bag.  Be particularly on the lookout for C. difficile enteritis in these patients when there is increased stool output, fever, hypotension, and/or leukocytosis2, and when in doubt, send a stool specimen from the ileostomy bag for C. difficile testing.

Although the pathophysiology of C. difficile enteritis is not fully understood, few observations are particularly intriguing: 

  • Small bowel mucosa may be colonized by C. difficile in about 3% of the population, potentially serving as a reservoir.2
  • Patients with ileostomy may develop a metaplasia of the terminal end mimicking colonic environment.4  
  • Exposure of rabbit ileum to C. difficile toxin A also causes significant epithelial necrosis with destruction of villi and neutrophil infiltration.5

 

References

  1. Dineen SP, Bailey SH, Pham TH, et al. Clostridium difficile enteritis: a report of two cases and systematic literature review. World J Gastrointest Surg 2013;5:37-42. https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9366/full/v5/i3/37.htm
  2. Boland E, Thompson JS. Fulminant Clostridium difficile enteritis after proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Gastroenterology Research and Practice 2008; 2008: Article ID 985658. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2633454/pdf/GRP2008-985658.pdf
  3. Freiler JF, Durning SJ, Ender PT. Clostridium difficile small bowel enteritis occurring after total colectomy. Clin Infect Dis 2001;33:1429-31. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/333b/d84978cfc4ac8fd21a15bc8fd26ff3160387.pdf
  4. Apel R, Cohen Z, Andrews CW, et al. Prospective evaluation of early morphological changes in pelvic ileal pouches. Gastroenterology 1994;107:435-43. http://www.gastrojournal.org/article/0016-5085(94)90169-4/pdf
  5. Triadafilopoulos G, Pothoulakis C, Obrien MJ, et al. Differential effects of Clostridium difficile toxins A and B on rabbit ileum. Gastroenterology 1987;93:273-279. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3596162
My patient with ulcerative colitis has had colectomy. Can she still get C. difficile infection?

In my patient with sepsis, is administration of proper antibiotics within an hour compared to 1-3 hours associated with better outcome?

The weight of the evidence based on observational studies suggests that the earlier the antibiotics are administered even within the first 3 hrs of the diagnosis of sepsis,  the better the patient outcome.

A 2017 study analyzing data from 37 studies (primarily observational) involving ~20,000 patients with severe sepsis and/or shock found a 10% increase in hospital mortality for every 1 hr delay in initiation of antibiotic therapy1. Two multicenter studies (1 in Pennsylvania2 and another in California3) and a New York State data base study involving patients with severe sepsis or septic shock4 similarly reported decreased survival with each 1- hr delay in antibiotic therapy. Another study of patients with severe sepsis found that each hour delay in first antibiotic dose administration was associated with an 8% increased risk of progression to shock5.

Despite the emphasis on the timing of the first dose of antibiotics, let’s not forget that the second dose of antibiotics should also be given on time in sepsis; a >25% delay is associated with increased mortality, length of stay and requirement for mechanical ventilation6.

So, yes, antibiotics should be given within 3 hours of diagnosis of sepsis, but within an hour followed by a timely second dose is even better!

Final Pearl: Did you know that sepsis is the 3rd leading cause of death in the US and contributes to 1 in every 2 to 3 hospital deaths7?

 

References

  1. Kalil AC, Johnson DW, Lisco SJ, et al. Early goal-directed therapy for sepsis: a novel solution for discordant survival outcomes in clinical trials. Crit Care Med 2017;45:607-14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28067711
  2. Seymour CW, Kahn JM, Martin-Gill, et al. Delays from first medical contact to antibiotic administration for sepsis. Crit Care Med 2017;45:759-65. https://insights.ovid.com/pubmed?pmid=28234754
  3. Liu VX, Fielding-Singh V, Greene JD, et al. Th timing of early antibiotics and hospital mortality in sepsis. Am J Respir Crit care Med 2017; 196;858-63. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28345952
  4. Seymour CW, Gesten F, Prescott HC, et al. Time to treatment and mortality during mandated emergency care for sepsis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:2235-44. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1703058
  5. Whiles BB, Deis AS, Simpson SQ. Increased time to initial antimicrobial administration is associated with progression to septic shock in severe sepsis patients. Crit Care Med 2017; 45:623-29. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28169944
  6. Leisman D, Huang V, Zhou Q, et al. Delayed second dose antibiotics for patients admitted from the emergency department with sepsis: prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes. Crit Care Med 2017;45:956-65. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28328652
  7. https://www.ecri.org/components/HRC/Documents/Sepsis%20at%20a%20Glance.pdf

 

If you enjoyed this pearl, sign up to get “Fresh Pearls from Oceans of Knowledge!” with each new post!

In my patient with sepsis, is administration of proper antibiotics within an hour compared to 1-3 hours associated with better outcome?

Is there any utility to laboratory testing for inherited thrombophilia or antiphospholipid syndrome in my hospitalized patient with unprovoked acute pulmonary embolism?

There is virtually no utility to obtaining heritable thrombophilia testing in acute hospital setting. In fact, there are potential harms due to false-positive and false-negative results which in turn may lead to increasing anxiety in the patient and added cost due to repeat testing.

As many tests obtained as part of this workup are functional assays—eg, the protein S, C, or antithrombin activity, and activated protein C resistance (often used to screen for factor V Leiden)— they are easily impacted by the physiologic effects of acute thrombosis as well as all anticoagulants.1

More importantly, testing for inherited thrombophilia will not impact management in the acute setting, as decisions regarding duration of anticoagulation are often made later in the outpatient setting. The proper time to evaluate the patient for inherited thrombophilias (if indicated) is at least one week following discontinuation of anticoagulation (minimum 3 months from the time of the index event). 2 

Testing for antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) may be considered in this setting though it should be noted that the lupus anticoagulant assay is impacted by nearly every anticoagulant, resulting in frequent false-positive results1, and therefore should be performed before initiation of these agents (or delayed until later if anticoagulation has already begun). A false-positive result has downstream implications as many patients with acute, uncomplicated venous thromboembolism (VTE) are discharged on a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), and antiphospholipid syndrome is currently considered a relative contraindication to the use of DOACs in VTE.

References
1. Moll, S. “Thrombophilia: Clinical-practical aspects.” J Thromb Thrombolysis 2015;39:367-78. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25724822
2. Connors JM. “Thrombophilia Testing and Venous Thrombosis.” N Engl J Med 2017; 377:1177-1187. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1700365 

Contributed by Hanny Al-Samkari, MD, Mass General Hospital, Boston, MA

If you liked this pearl, sign up to receive future pearls “Fresh from Oceans of Knowledge”!
Continue reading “Is there any utility to laboratory testing for inherited thrombophilia or antiphospholipid syndrome in my hospitalized patient with unprovoked acute pulmonary embolism?”

Is there any utility to laboratory testing for inherited thrombophilia or antiphospholipid syndrome in my hospitalized patient with unprovoked acute pulmonary embolism?

Should prothrombin complex concentrates be used to reverse anticoagulation from direct factor Xa inhibitors?

Due to insufficient and occasionally conflicting evidence, the use of prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) for reversal of direct factor Xa inhibitors (eg, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) is NOT recommended.1 This is because PCCs have no effect on the anti-Xa assay, the most accurate measure of anticoagulation for direct factor Xa inhibitors.

Although several in vitro and in vivo studies initially suggested that PCCs may be effective for this purpose, anti-Xa activity has not been measured in these studies2-4; PT and aPTT are not reflective of the anticoagulation activity of direct factor Xa inhibitors.

In fact, a 2014 study found no difference in the anti-Xa activity between 11 patients on rivaroxaban who were given a 4-factor PCC (Beriplex®, the European brand name for Kcentra®) and 12 patients on rivaroxaban receiving saline.5 Though small, this is the best published in vivo data to date examining the effect of 4-factor PCC on the anti-Xa levels of patients on direct factor Xa inhibitors.

A theoretical concern with the use of PCCs is increased risk of thrombosis when the therapeutic effect of these direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) is gone (half-life ~12 h) while the thrombogenic effects of PCCs persist (eg, in critically ill, postoperative, or sedentary patients).

The good news is that more specific reversal agents are in the pipeline. 1 Stay tuned! 

 

References:

  1. Dzik WH. “Reversal of oral factor Xa inhibitors by prothrombin complex concentrates: a re-appraisal.” J Thromb Haemost 2015;13 (Suppl 1):S187-94. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26149022
  2. Perzborn E, Heutmeier S, Laux V, et al. “Reversal of rivaroxaban-induced anticoagulation with prothrombin complex concentrate, activated prothrombin complex concentrate and recombinant activated factor VII in vitro.” Thromb Res 2014 Apr;133:671-81. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24529498
  3. Eerenberg ES, Kamphuisen PW, Sijpkens MK, et al. “Reversal of rivaroxaban and dabigatran by prothrombin complex concentrate: a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study in healthy subjects.” Circulation 2011 Oct 4;124:1573-9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21900088
  4. Zahir H, Brown KS, Vandell AG, et al. “Edoxaban effects on bleeding following punch biopsy and reversal by a 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate.” Circulation 2015 Jan 6;131:82-90. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25403645
  5. Levi M, Moore KT, Castillejos CF, et al. “Comparison of three-factor and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates regarding reversal of the anticoagulant effects of rivaroxaban in healthy volunteers.” J Thromb Haemost 2014;12:1428-36. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24811969

Contributed by Hanny Al-Samkari MD, Mass General Hospital, Boston, MA.

 

If you liked this pearl, sign up to get future pearls  “Fresh from oceans of knowledge!”

 

Should prothrombin complex concentrates be used to reverse anticoagulation from direct factor Xa inhibitors?

Is iron therapy contraindicated in my patient with active infection?

In the absence of randomized-controlled trials of iron therapy in patients with active infection, the harmful effects of iron therapy (IT) in this setting remains more theoretical than proven. 1,2

Although many pathogens (eg, E. coli, Klebsiella, Salmonella, Yersinia, and Staphylococcus species) depend on iron for their growth2,3, and iron overload states (eg, hemochromatosis) predispose to a variety of infections, studies evaluating the risk of infection with iron therapy have reported conflicting results.1-4 A 2015 systematic review and meta-analysis of 103 trials comparing IV iron therapy  with several other approaches, including oral iron therapy or placebo, found no increased risk of infections with IV iron.5 In contrast, an earlier systematic review and meta-analysis involving fewer number of trials found an increased risk of infections with IV iron. 6

These varied results are perhaps not surprising since the effects of iron therapy on the risk of infection is likely to be context-specific, depending on the patient’s preexisting iron status, exposure to potential infections and co-infection and genetic background. 4 Of interest, mice with sepsis have worse outcomes when treated with IV iron.7

Perhaps the most prudent approach is to hold off on iron therapy until the active infection is controlled, unless the benefits of urgent iron therapy is thought to outweigh its theoretical harmful effects.

 

References

  1. Daoud E, Nakhla E, Sharma R. Is iron therapy for anemia harmful in the setting of infection? Clev Clin J Med 2011;78:168-70. http://www.mdedge.com/ccjm/article/95480/hematology/iron-therapy-anemia-harmful-setting-infection
  2. Hain D, Braun M. IV iron: to give or to hold in the presence of infection in adults undergoing hemodialysis. Nephrology Nursing Journal 2015;42:279-83. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26207288
  3. Jonker FAM, van Hensbroek MB. Anaemia, iron deficiency and susceptibility of infections. J Infect 204;69:523-27. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28397964
  4. Drakesmith H, Prentice AM. Hepcidin and the iron-infection axis. Science 2012;338:768-72. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23139325  
  5. Avni T, Bieber A, Grossman A, et al. The safety of intravenous iron preparations: systematic review and meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc 2015;90:12-23. http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(14)00883-0/pdf
  6. Litton E, Xiao J, Ho KM. Safety and efficacy of intravenous iron therapy in reducing requirement for allogeneic blood transfusion: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. BMJ 2013;347:f4822. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23950195
  7. Javadi P, Buchman TG, Stromberg PE, et al. High dose exogenous iron following cecal ligation and puncture increases mortality rate in mice and is associated with an increase in gut epithelial and splenic apoptosis. Crit Care Med 2004;32:1178-1185. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15190970
Is iron therapy contraindicated in my patient with active infection?

Can constipation precede the diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease by years?

Although the association of constipation and Parkinson’s disease (PD) is well known, less appreciated is that constipation may be among the earliest symptoms of PD, affecting 50% of patients for up to 20 years before the onset of motor symptoms.1  

A 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis found that patients with constipation were at significantly higher risk of developing subsequent PD (O.R. 2.27, 95% CI 2.1-2.46).2 Even, when analysis was restricted to studies assessing constipation more than 10 years prior to PD, the risk was equally elevated. In an interesting longitudinal study in which information on the frequency of bowel movements was collected from men aged 51-75 y, a strong association between < 1 bowel movement daily and subsequent diagnosis of PD was reported (average followup 12 y).3

Given the potential multicentric nature of neurodegenerative process in PD, these findings are perhaps not too surprising. Inflammation and other pathological processes in PD may involve not only the brain but also the intestine, leading to uncoordinated bowel-related muscle involvement and transit disorder, respectively.1 Indeed, Lewy bodies and α-synucleine immunoreactive inclusion bodies have been observed in the intramural ganglia of the GI tract of PD patients.4

Final fun pearl: Did you know that caffeine may reduce the risk of PD?5

 

References

  1. Chen Y, Yu M, Liu X, et al. Clinical characteristics and peripheral T cell subsets in Parkinson’s disease patients with constipation. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2015;8:2495-2504. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26045755
  2. Adams-Carr KL, Bestwick JP, Shribman S, et al. Constipation preceding Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:710-6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26345189
  3. Abbott RD, Petrovitch H, White LR, et al. Frequency of bowel movements and the future risk of Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 2001;14:57:456-62. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11502913
  4. Jost WH. Gastrointestinal dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Sci 2010;289;69-73. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19717168
  5. Costa J, Lunet N, Santos C, et al. Caffeine exposure and the risk of Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Alzheimers Dis 2010;20 (Suppl 1):S221-38. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20182023
Can constipation precede the diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease by years?

Are two sets of blood cultures adequate for evaluation of bacteremia in my febrile patient?

For great majority of patients, more than 2 sets of blood cultures is not likely to significantly improve the yield of detecting bacteremia. 

Although a 2004 report suggested that 2 sets of blood cultures over 24 h period had a sensitivity of only 80% for bacteremia, several other studies have found much higher sensitivities, ranging from ~90%- 99% 2-3. When broken down by organism, sensitivity of 2 sets of blood cultures may be highest for Staphylococcus aureus (97%), followed by E. coli (91%), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (90%) 2.  The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines recommend paired blood culture sets (each set with 2 bottles, 10 ml of blood in each) to detect about 90-95% of patients with documented bacteremia, and 3 sets for 95-99% detection rate 4.

It seems prudent to strike a balance between drawing more than 2 sets of blood cultures—with its attendant risk of picking up contaminants— and what may be a definite but small incremental increase in the rate of detection of true bacteremia.

Whatever you do,  please don’t order only 1 set of blood cultures! Aside from its generally low yield, when positive it may be difficult to distinguish contaminants from true invaders.

 

References

  1. Cockerill FR, Reed GS, Hughes JG, et al. Clinical comparison of BACTEC 9240 Plus Aerobic/F resin bottles and the Isolator aerobic cultures. Clin Infect Dis 2004;38:1724-30. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9163464
  2. Lee A, Mirrett S, Reller LB, et al. Detection of bloodstream infections in adults: how many cultures are needed? J Clin Microbiol 2007; 45:3546-48. http://jcm.asm.org/content/45/11/3546
  3. Towns ML, Jarvis WR, Hsueh PR. Guidelines on blood cultures. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2010;43:347-49. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20688297
  4. Weinstein MP, Reller LB, Murphy JR, et al. The clinical significance of positive blood cultures: a comprehensive analysis of 500 episodes of bacteremia and fungemia in adults. I. Laboratory and eipidemiologic observations. Rev Infect Dis 1982;5:35-53. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6828811
Are two sets of blood cultures adequate for evaluation of bacteremia in my febrile patient?