How long should I treat my patient with urinary tract infection and E. Coli bacteremia?

Although traditionally 7 to 14 days of antibiotic therapy has been recommended for Gram-negative bacteremia, more recent studies suggest that shorter antibiotic treatment courses are as effective as longer treatments for a variety of infections, particuarly those due to Enterobacteriaceae (eg, E. Coli, Klebsiella sp) in patients with low severity illness (1).

 
A 2019 randomized-controlled study involving primarily patients with bacteremia caused by E. Coli or Klebsiella sp. (~75%) with most cases associated with UTI (~70%) found that 7 days was as effective as 14 days of treatment in hemodynamically stable patients who are afebrile for at least 48 hours without an ongoing focus of infection (1). More specifically, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the rates of relapse of bacteremia or mortality at 14 or 28 days.

 
An accompanying editorial concluded that “7 days of treatment may be sufficient for hospitalized, non-critically ill patients with Gram-negative bacteremia and with signs of early response to treatment” (2).  Again, the accent should be on hemodynamically stable patients who respond rapidly to treatment. 

 
These articles reflect a recent overall trend in antibiotic therapy that favors shorter courses of therapy for many common infections, as nicely summarized by a 2016 article (3).
• Community-acquired pneumonia                               3-5 days (vs 7-10 days)
• Nosocomial pneumonia                                                 8 days or less (vs 10-15 days)
• Pyelonephritis                                                                  5-7 days (vs 10-14 days)
• Intraabdominal infection                                             4 days (vs 10 days)
• COPD acute exacerbation                                             5 days or less (vs >6 days)
• Acute bacterial sinusitis                                               5 days (vs 10 days)
• Cellulitis                                                                            5-6 days (vs 10 days)

 

 

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References
1. Yahav D, Franceschini E, Koppel F, et al. Seven versus 14 days of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated Gram-negative bacteremia: A noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2019; 69:1091-8. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/69/7/1091/5237874
2. Daneman D, Fowler RA. Shortening antibiotic treatment durations for bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2019;69:1099-1100. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/69/7/1099/5237877?redirectedFrom=fulltext
3. Spellberg B. The new antibiotic mantra: “ Shorter is better”. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:1254-55. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2536180

How long should I treat my patient with urinary tract infection and E. Coli bacteremia?

Is there any evidence that routinely wearing gowns and gloves upon entry into the rooms of patients on contact precautions for MRSA or VRE really works?

Although routine gowning and gloving in the care of hospitalized patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE)—also known as contact precautions (CP)— is considered a standard of care (1), the evidence supporting its effectiveness in preventing endemic hospital-associated multidrug-resistant organism (MDROs) infections is not robust and is often conflicting. In fact, this practice is increasingly being questioned (including by some hospital epidemiologists) as means of preventing endemic transmission of MDROs in hospitals (1-7).
Critics often point out that studies supporting the use of CP in MDROs are observational, involving only outbreak situations where they were instituted as part of a bundled approach (eg, improved hand hygiene), making it difficult to determine its relative contribution to infection prevention (2,6).
In fact, recent cluster-randomized trials have largely failed to demonstrate clear benefit of CP over usual care for the prevention of acquiring MRSA or VRE in hospitalized patients (2,4). Furthermore, a meta-analysis of studies in which CP were eliminated failed to find an increase in the subsequent rates of transmission of MRSA, VRE, or other MDROs (2,7).
Based on these and other studies, some have suggested that in the presence of other infection prevention measures (eg, hand hygiene monitoring), CP be implemented only in select circumstances such as open or draining wounds, severe diarrhea or outbreak situations (3).

 

The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), along with the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Society of Healthcare Epidemiologists of America (SHEA), however, continue to recommend implementation of CP in the care of patients with MDROs.  

 

If you liked this post, get the P4P app for your smart phone and sign up

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!
References
1. Maragakis LL, Jernigan JA. Things we do for good reasons: contact precautions for multidrug-resistant organisms, including MRSA and VRE. J Hosp Med 2019;14:194-6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30811332
2. Young K, Doernberg SB, Snedcor RF, et al. Things we do for no reason:contact precautions for MRSA and VRE. J Hosp Med 2019;14:178-80. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30811326
3. Bearman G, Abbas S, Masroor N, et al. Impact of discontinuing contact precautions for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomyin-resistant Enerococcus: an interrupted time series analysis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39: 676-82. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/infection-control-and-hospital-epidemiology/article/impact-of-discontinuing-contact-precautions-for-methicillinresistant-staphylococcus-aureus-and-vancomycinresistant-enterococcus-an-interrupted-time-series-analysis/869CD5E44B339770AC771BC06049B98F
4. Harris AD, Pineles L, Belton B, et al. Universal glove and gown use and acquisition of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the ICU. A randomized trial. JAMA 2013;310:1571-80. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24097234
5. Morgan DJ, Murthy R, Munoz-Price LS, et al. Reconsidering contact precautions for endemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:1163-72. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/infection-control-and-hospital-epidemiology/article/reconsidering-contact-precautions-for-endemic-methicillinresistant-staphylococcus-aureus-and-vancomycinresistant-enterococcus/CCB41BF48CEC2185CC4D69AF3730584C
6. Morgan DJ, Wenzel RP, Bearman G. Contact precautions for endemic MRSA and VRE. Time to retire legal mandates. JAMA 2017;318:329-30. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2635333
7. Marra AR, Edmond MB, Schweizer ML, et al. Discontinuing contact precautions for multidrug-resistant organisms: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Am J Infect Control 208;46:333-340. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29031432

Is there any evidence that routinely wearing gowns and gloves upon entry into the rooms of patients on contact precautions for MRSA or VRE really works?

Should I consider acute acalculous cholecystitis in my elderly ambulatory patient admitted with right upper quadrant pain?

Short answer: Yes! Although we usually associate acute acalculous cholecystitis (AAC) with critically ill patients (eg, with sepsis, trauma, shock, major burns) in ICUs, AAC is not as rare as we might think in ambulatory patients. In fact, a 7 year study of AAC involving multiple centers reported that AAC among outpatients was increasing in prevalence and accounted for 77% of all cases (1)!

 
Although the pathophysiology of ACC is not fully understood, bile stasis and ischemia of the gallbladder either due to microvascular or macrovascular pathology have been implicated as potential causes (2). One study found that 72% of outpatients who developed ACC had atherosclerotic disease associated with hypertension, coronary, peripheral or cerebral vascular disease, diabetes or congestive heart failure (1). Interestingly, in contrast to calculous cholecystitis, “multiple arterial occlusions” have been observed on pathological examination of the gallbladder in at least some patients with ACC and accordingly a name change to “acute ischemic cholecystitis” has been proposed (3).

 
AAC can also complicate acute mesenteric ischemia and may herald critical ischemia and mesenteric infarction (3). The fact that cystic artery is a terminal branch artery probably doesn’t help and leaves the gallbladder more vulnerable to ischemia when arterial blood flow is compromised irrespective of the cause (4).

 
Of course, besides vascular ischemia there are numerous other causes of ACC, including infectious (eg, viral hepatitis, cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, Salmonella, brucellosis, malaria, Rickettsia and enteroviruses), as well as many non-infectious causes such as vasculitides and, more recently, check-point inhibitor toxicity (1,5-8).

 
Bonus Pearl: Did you know that in contrast to cholecystitis associated with gallstones (where females and 4th and 5th decade age groups predominate), ACC in ambulatory patients is generally more common among males and older age groups (mean age 65 y) (1)?

 

If you liked this post, download the app and sign up under MENU to catch future pearls straight into your inbox, all for free! 

 

References
1. Savoca PE, Longo WE, Zucker KA, et al. The increasing prevalence of acalculous cholecystitis in outpatients: Result of a 7-year study. Ann Surg 1990;211: 433-37. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1358029/pdf/annsurg00170-0061.pdf
2. Huffman JL, Schenker S. Acute acalculous cholecystitis: A review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8:15-22. https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(09)00880-5/pdf
3. Hakala T, Nuutinene PJO, Ruokonen ET, et al. Microangiopathy in acute acalculous cholecystitis Br J Surg 1997;84:1249-52. https://bjssjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-2168.1997.02775.x?sid=nlm%3Apubmed
4. Melo R, Pedro LM, Silvestre L, et al. Acute acalculous cholecystitis as a rare manifestation of chronic mesenteric ischemia. A case report. Int J Surg Case Rep 2016;25:207-11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4941110/
5. Aguilera-Alonso D, Median EVL, Del Rosal T, et al. Acalculous cholecystitis in a pediatric patient with Plasmodium falciparum infection: A case report and literature review. Ped Infect Dis J 2018;37: e43-e45. https://journals.lww.com/pidj/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2018&issue=02000&article=00020&type=Fulltext  
6. Kaya S, Eskazan AE, Ay N, et al. Acute acalculous cholecystitis due to viral hepatitis A. Case Rep Infect Dis 2013;Article ID 407182. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784234/pdf/CRIM.ID2013-407182.pdf
7. Simoes AS, Marinhas A, Coelho P, et al. Acalculous acute cholecystitis during the course of an enteroviral infection. BMJ Case Rep 2013;12. https://casereports.bmj.com/content/12/4/e228306
8. Abu-Sbeih H, Tran CN, Ge PS, et al. Case series of cancer patients who developed cholecystitis related to immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. J ImmunoTherapy of Cancer 2019;7:118. https://jitc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40425-019-0604-2

 

 

Should I consider acute acalculous cholecystitis in my elderly ambulatory patient admitted with right upper quadrant pain?

When should I suspect invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in my patient with COPD exacerbation?

Think of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) in your patient when she or he has a COPD exacerbation that appears refractory to broad-spectrum antibiotics and high doses of steroids. Heighten your suspicion even more in patients with severe-steroid dependent COPD, presence of a new pulmonary infiltrate or isolation of Aspergillus spp from respiratory cultures. 1

It’s worth remembering that although dyspnea and bronchospasm are found in most COPD patients with IPA, in contrast to haematological patients, fever, chest pain and hemoptysis are usually absent in this patient population.1

Diagnosis of IPA in this patient population is challenging for several reasons including: 1. A definitive or “proven” diagnosis requires histopathologic evidence of Aspergillus invasion of lung tissue which is not possible without subjecting an already fragile patient to invasive procedures (eg, lung aspiration or biopsy); 2. In contrast to IPA in highly susceptible immunocompromised patients with cancer and recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplants, standardized definition of IPA in patients with COPD is lacking; 1,3 and 3. Frequent colonization of the respiratory tract of COPD patients with Aspergillus spp (16.3 per 1000 COPD admission in 1 study) 4,5, makes it difficult to diagnose IPA based on cultures alone.

Aside from respiratory cultures, another non-invasive test, serum galactomannan (GM, a polysaccharide antigen that exists primarily in the cell walls of Aspergillus spp and released into the blood during its growth phase 6) may have some utility in suggesting IPA in COPD patients, albeit with a mediocre sensitivity (~30-60%) but respectable specificity (>80 %). In contrast, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid GM may have better sensitivity  (~75%-90%) with similar specificity as that of serum GM in the diagnosis of IPA in these patients 7-8

Bonus pearl: Did you know that the incidence of IPA appears to be increasing in COPD patients requiring ICU admission, with reported mortality rates of 67% to 100%? 7

If you liked this post, download P4P app and sign up under MENU to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

 

References

  1. Bulpa P, Dive A, Sibille Y. Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Res J 2007;30:782-800. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17906086
  2. Bulpa P, Bihin B, Dimopoulos G, et al. Which algorithm diagnoses invasive pulmonary aspergillosis best in ICU patietns with COPD? Eur Resir J 2017;50:1700532 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28954783
  3. Barberan J, Garcia-Perez FJ, Villena V, et al. Development of aspergillosis in a cohort of non-neutropenic, non-transplant patients colonized by Aspergillus spp. BMC Infect Dis 2017;17:34. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12879-016-2143-5
  4. Guinea J, Torres-Narbona M, Gijon P, et al. Pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: incidence, risk factors, and outcome. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010; 16:870-77. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1198743X14617432
  5. Blot Stijn I, Taccone FS, Van den Abeele A-M, et al. A clinical algorithm to diagnose invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 202;186:56-64. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/full/10.1164/rccm.201111-1978OC
  6. Pfeiffer CD, Fine JP, Safdar N. Diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis using a galactomannan assay: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2006;42:1417-27. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/42/10/1417/278148
  7. He H, Ding L, Sun B, et al. Role of galactomannan determinations in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from critically ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: a prospective study. Critical Care 2012;16:R138. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5066034/
  8. Zhou W, Li H, Zhang Y, et al. Diagnostic value of galactomannan antigen test in serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from patients with nonneutropenic invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. J Clin Microbiol 2017;55:2153-61. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28446576
When should I suspect invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in my patient with COPD exacerbation?

How useful is serum 1, 3-β-D-glucan in diagnosing Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia and invasive fungal disease?

Serum 1, 3-β-D-glucan (BG) is highly accurate for Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP), but only moderately accurate for diagnosing invasive fungal disease (IFD).

For PJP, a meta-analysis of studies looking at the performance of BG found a pooled sensitivity of 96%, specificity of 84% and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.96. 1 Thus, a negative BG essentially rules out PJP.

For IFD (primarily invasive candidiasis or aspergillosis), data based on 3 separate meta-analyses came to similar conclusions with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of ~80% and AUC-ROC of ~0.89 each.1-3 In some of the studies,2,3 the sensitivity of BG for IFD was between 50% to 60% which makes it difficult to exclude IFD when BG is normal.

Remember that BG may be false-positive in a variety of situations, including patients receiving immunological preparations (eg albumin or globulins), use of membranes and filters made from cellulose in hemodialysis, and use of cotton gauze swabs/packs/pads and sponges during surgery. 1 In addition, although BG is a component of the cell wall of most fungi, there are some exceptions including Zygomycetes and cryptococci.

Bonus pearl: Did you know that BG assay is based on Limulus amoebocyte lysate, extracted from amoebocytes of horseshoe crab species? 3

If you like this post, sign up under MENU and catch future pearls right in your inbox!

References

  1. Onishi A, Sugiyama D, Kogata Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of serum 1,3-β-D-glucan for Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia, invasive candidiasis, and invasive aspergillosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Microbiol 2012;50:7-15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22075593
  2. He S, Hang JP, Zhang L, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of serum 1,3–β-D-glucan for invasive fungal infection: focus on cutoff levels. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2015;48:351-61. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25081986
  3. Karageogopoulos DE, Vouloumanou EK, Ntziora F, et al. β-D-glucan assay for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2011;52:750-69. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/52/6/750/361658/

 

How useful is serum 1, 3-β-D-glucan in diagnosing Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia and invasive fungal disease?

My 70 year old male patient is admitted with 1 day of fever, dysuria, and urinary frequency and urgency, but has a negative urine dipstick test for nitrites and leukocyte esterase. Could he still have acute bacterial prostatitis?

Short answer: Yes! In fact, no routine clinical imaging test can adequately rule out prostatic involvement in men with urinary tract infection (UTI) symptoms (1)! 

Although the presence of nitrites and leukocyte esterase (LE) may have a high positive predictive value for acute bacterial prostatitis (ABP) (~95%), their combined absence has a negative predictive value of only ~70%; ie, we may miss about one-third of patients with UTI symptoms if we relied solely on the results of nitrite and LE urine dipstick (2,3). Negative nitrites alone has a negative predictive value of only ~ 45%, while a negative LE has a negative predictive value of ~60% (3).

To evaluate for ABP, our patient should undergo rectal exam for prostatic tenderness, as should all men with UTI symptoms. The finding of a tender prostate in this setting is supportive of ABP, although its absence will still not rule out this diagnosis because the reported sensitivity of rectal exam may vary from 9% to 100% in ABP (1). 
Although there may not be a general agreement on the definition of ABP, 2 studies utilizing indium-labeled leukocyte scintigraphy or a combination of PSA levels and transrectal ultrasound have provided evidence for frequent prostatic involvement in men with UTI symptoms (4,5).  In these studies, an inflammatory reaction within the prostate was seen in the majority of cases, even when the digital rectal examination was not painful or when clinicians diagnosed pyelonephritis without prostatitis.
Bonus pearl: Did you know that the lifetime probability of a man receiving a diagnosis of prostatitis is >25% (1)? 

Also see a related P4P pearl: https://pearls4peers.com/2017/07/27/should-male-patients-with-suspected-urinary-tract-infection-routinely-undergo-a-prostate-exam/

 

If you liked this post, sign up under MENU and catch future pearls right into your inbox!
References
1. Etienne M, Chavanet P, Sibert L, et al. Acute bacterial prostatitis: heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria and management. Retrospective multicentric analysis of 371 patients diagnosed with acute prostatitis. BMC Infect Dis 2008, 8:12 doi:10.1186/1471-2334-8-12. https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-8-12
2. Lipsky BA, Byren I, Hoey CT. Treatment of bacterial prostatitis. Clin Infect Dis 2010;50:1641-1652. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/50/12/1641/305217
3. Etienne M, Pestel-Caron M, Chavanet P, et al. Performance of the urine leukocyte esterase and nitrite dipstick test for the diagnosis of acute prostatitis. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:951-53. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/46/6/951/351423
4. Velasco M, Mateos JJ, Martinez JA, et al. Accurate topographical diagnosis of urinary tract infection in male patients with (111)indium-labelled leukocyte scintigraphy. Eur J Intern Med 2004;15:157-61. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15245717
5. Ulleryd P, Zackrisson B, Aus G, et al. Prostatic involvement in men with febrie urinary tract infection as measured by serum prostate-specific antigen and transrectal ultrasonography. BJU Int 1999;84:470-74. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00164.x

 

My 70 year old male patient is admitted with 1 day of fever, dysuria, and urinary frequency and urgency, but has a negative urine dipstick test for nitrites and leukocyte esterase. Could he still have acute bacterial prostatitis?

My elderly patient with abdominal pain has a negative Murphy’s sign on physical exam. How accurate is Murphy’s sign in diagnosing cholecystitis?

Not as accurate as we might like! In fact, no single clinical finding has been found to carry sufficient weight in ruling in or excluding cholecystitis and Murphy’s sign (inability to take a deep breath due to pain upon palpation of the right upper quadrant) is no exception. 1

A meta-analysis of patients with Murphy’s sign reported a sensitivity of 65% and a specificity of 87% (positive LR 2.8, negative LR 0.4, with 95% C.I. including 1.0 in both). 1,2  However, among the elderly (mean age 79 y), the sensitivity may be a slow as 48% 2 and in patients with gangrenous cholecystitis as low as 33%.3  

In contrast, Murphy’ s sign elicited at the time of ultrasound of the gallbladder (ie,“sonographic Murphy’s) is generally thought to very sensitive  (>90%) for acute cholecystitis;3,4 1 study reported a sensitivity of 63%, however (specificity 94%).5  Remember that altered mental status may also mask sonographic Murphy’s sign. 

Indirect fist percussion of the liver has been suggested by some authors as a more sensitive alternative to Murphy’s sign (100% vs 80%) in a small series of patients with cholecystitis.2

Bonus pearl: Did you know that another technique originally described by the famed American surgeon, John Murphy, to diagnose acute cholecystitis consisted of the “hammer stroke maneuver” in which percussion of the right midsubcostal region with the bent middle finger of the left hand was performed using the right hand to strike the dorsum of the left hand with hammer-like blows? 6

If you liked this post, sign up under MENU and catch future pearls right into your inbox!

References

  1. Trowbridge RL, Rutkowski NK, Shojania KG. Does this patient have acute cholecystitis. JAMA 2003;289:80-86. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/195707
  2. Ueda T, Ishida E. Indirect fist percussion of the liver is a more sensitive technique for detecting hepatobiliary infections than Murphy’s sign. Current Gerontol Geriat Res, Volume 2015, Article ID 431638. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/cggr/2015/431638/
  3. Simeone JF, Brink JA, Mueller PR, et al. The sonographic diagnosis of acute gangrenous cholecystitis. The importance of the Murphy sign. AJR 1989;152:289-90. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2643262
  4. O’Connor OJ, Maher MM. Imaging of cholecystitis. AJR 2011;196:W36774. https://www.ajronline.org/doi/full/10.2214/AJR.10.4340
  5. Rallis PW, Lapin SA, Quinn MF, et al. Prospective evaluation of the sonographic Murphy sign in suspected acute cholecystitis. J Clin Ultrasound 1982;10:113-5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6804512
  6. Salati SA, al Kadi A. Murphy’s sign of cholecystitis-a brief revisit. Journal of Signs and Symptoms 2012;1:53-6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230820198_Murphy’s_sign_of_cholecystitis-_a_brief_revisit

 

 

My elderly patient with abdominal pain has a negative Murphy’s sign on physical exam. How accurate is Murphy’s sign in diagnosing cholecystitis?

Should I routinely select antibiotics with activity against anaerobes in my patients with presumed aspiration pneumonia?

Anaerobes have been considered a major cause of aspiration pneumonia (AP) based on studies published in 1970’s (1-3). More recent data, however, suggest that anaerobes no longer play an important role in most cases of AP (4-7) and routine inclusion of specific anti-anaerobic drugs in their treatment is no longer necessary.

 
An important reason for anaerobes not playing an important role in AP in the current era is the change in the demographics of patients who may be affected. Patients reported in older studies often suffered from alcohol use disorder, drug ingestion, seizure disorders and acute cerebrovascular accident. In contrast, more recent data show that AP often occurs in nursing home residents, the elderly with cognitive impairment, and those with dysphagia, gastrointestinal dysmotility or tube feeding (8,9).

 
In addition, many cases of AP reported in older studies involved delay of 4 or more days before seeking medical attention and, not surprisingly, often presented with lung abscess, necrotizing pneumonia, empyema, or putrid sputum, features that are relatively rare in the current era.

 
Further supporting the diminishing role of anaerobes in AP, are recent microbiological studies of the respiratory tract in AP revealing the infrequent isolation of anaerobes and, even when isolated, often coexisting with aerobic bacteria. The latter observation is important because, due to the alteration in the redox potential (9,10), treatment of aerobic bacteria alone may lead to less oxygenation consumption and less favorable environment for survival of anaerobes in the respiratory tract.

 
We should also always consider the potential adverse effects of unnecessary antibiotics with anaerobic activity in our frequently debilitated patients, including gastrointestinal dysbiosis (associated with Clostridiodes difficile infections and overgrowth of antibiotic-resistant pathogens such as vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), hypersensitivity reactions, drug interactions, and central nervous system toxicity (11,12).

 
Thus, the weight of the evidence does not justify routine anaerobic coverage of AP in today’s patients.

 

Liked this post? Sign up under MENU and catch future pearls straight into your inbox!

References
1. Bartlett JG, Gorbach SL, Finegold SM. The bacteriology of aspiration pneumonia. Am J Med. 1974;56(2):202-7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4812076
2. Bartlett JG, Finegold SM. Anaerobic pleuropulmonary infections. Medicine (Baltimore). 1972;51(6):413-50. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4564416
3. Bartlett JG, Gorbach SL. The triple threat of aspiration pneumonia. Chest. 1975;68(4):560-6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1175415
4. Finegold SM. Aspiration pneumonia. Rev Infect Dis. 1991;13 Suppl 9:S737-42. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1925318
5. Bartlett JG. How important are anaerobic bacteria in aspiration pneumonia: when should they be treated and what is optimal therapy. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2013;27(1):149-55. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23398871
6. El-Solh AA, Pietrantoni C, Bhat A, Aquilina AT, Okada M, Grover V, et al. Microbiology of severe aspiration pneumonia in institutionalized elderly. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003;167(12):1650-4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12689848
7. Marik PE, Careau P. The role of anaerobes in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia and aspiration pneumonia: a prospective study. Chest. 1999;115(1):178-83. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9925081
8. Bowerman TJ, Zhang J, Waite LM. Antibacterial treatment of aspiration pneumonia in older people: a systematic review. Clin Interv Aging. 2018;13:2201-13. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30464429
9. Mandell LA, Niederman MS. Aspiration Pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 14;380(7):651-663. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1714562. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30763196
10. Walden, W. C., & Hentges, D. J. (1975). Differential effects of oxygen and oxidation-reduction potential on the multiplication of three species of anaerobic intestinal bacteria. Applied microbiology, 30(5), 781–785. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC187272/
11. Sullivan A, Edlund C, Nord CE. Effect of antimicrobial agents on the ecological balance of human microflora. Lancet Infect Dis. 2001;1(2):101-14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11871461
12. Bhalla A, Pultz NJ, Ray AJ, Hoyen CK, Eckstein EC, Donskey CJ. Antianaerobic antibiotic therapy promotes overgrowth of antibiotic-resistant, gram-negative bacilli and vancomycin-resistant enterococci in the stool of colonized patients. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003;24(9):644-9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14510245

 

Contributed by Amar Vedamurthy, MD, MPH, Mass General Hospital, Boston, MA

Should I routinely select antibiotics with activity against anaerobes in my patients with presumed aspiration pneumonia?

My previously healthy patient developed a viral illness with fever and headache few days after swimming in a community pool. Can swimming pools be a source of viral infection?

Yes! Swimming pools have been implicated in the transmission of a variety of pathogens,  including enteric viruses (eg, echovirus, coxackie virus, hepatitis A virus, norovirus) which account for nearly one-half of all swimming pool-related outbreaks.  Adenoviruses also account for a significant number of swimming pool outbreaks.1,2

The most commonly reported symptoms in swimming pool outbreaks have been gastroenteritis, respiratory symptoms and conjunctivitis. However, aseptic meningitis and hepatitis may also occur. 1

Because viruses cannot replicate in the environment outside of host tissues, their presence in swimming pool is the result of direct contamination by those in the water who may shed viruses through unintentional fecal release or through body fluids, such as saliva, mucus, or vomitus.  The finding of E. coli in 58% of pool water samples in 1 CDC study suggests the presence of stool as a primary source of infection.3

On average, each person has 0.14 grams (range 0.1 gram to 10 grams) of fecal material on their perianal surface that could rinse into the water if pre-swim shower with soap is omitted.4-5 Coupled with the potential for inadequate disinfection or chlorination of pool water, it is not surprising that swimming pools may serve as a source of infection.  

CDC recommends keeping feces and urine out of the water, checking the chlorine level and pH before getting into the water and not swallowing the water you swim in.3 

Bonus pearl: Did you know that pool water has also been associated with Cryptosporidium and Giardia and waterslides with E.coli-0157 outbreaks?

If you liked this post, sign up under MENU and catch future pearls right into your inbox!

References

  1. Bonadonna L, La Rosa G. A review and update on waterborne viral diseases associated with swimming pools. Int j Environ Res Public Health 2019;16, 166. Doi:10.3390/ijerph16020166. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352248/
  2. Keswick BH, Gebra CP, Goyal SM. Occurrence of enteroviruses in community swimming pools. Am J Public Health 1981;71:1026030. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6267950
  3. CDC.Microbes in pool filter backwash as evidence of the need for improved swimmer hygiene—Metro-Atlanta, Georgia, 2012. MMWR 2013;62:385-88. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6219a3.htm
  4. Gerba CP. Assessment of enteric pathogen shedding by bathers during recreational activity and its impact on water quality. Quant Microbiol 2000; 2:55-68 https://arizona.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/assessment-of-enteric-pathogen-shedding-by-bathers-during-recreat
  5. CDC. Model Aquatic Health Code. 8.0 Annexes: fecal/vomit/blood contamination response Annex (6.0 policies and management), 2008. https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/pdf/swimming/pools/mahc/structure-content/mahc-fecal-vomit-blood-contamination-response-annex.pdf
  6. CDC. Surveillance of waterborne disease outbreaks and other health events associated with recreational water—United States, 2007-2008 and surveillance of waterborne disease outbreaks associated with drinking water—United States, 2007-2008. MMWR 2011;60. 1-76. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21937976

 

 

My previously healthy patient developed a viral illness with fever and headache few days after swimming in a community pool. Can swimming pools be a source of viral infection?

My patient with diabetes mellitus is now admitted with pneumonia. Does diabetes increase the risk of pneumonia requiring hospitalization?

The weight of the evidence to date suggests that diabetes mellitus (DM) does increase the risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization.1-3

A large population-based study involving over 30,000 patients found an adjusted relative risk (RR) of hospitalization with pneumonia of 1.26 (95% C.I 1.2-1.3) among patients with DM compared to non-diabetics.  Of note, the risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization was significantly higher in type 1 as well as type 2 DM and among patients whose A1C level was ≥9.1  Another population-based study found a high prevalence of DM (25.6%) in patients hospitalized with CAP, more than double that in the population studied.2  A 2016 meta-analysis of observational studies also found increased incidence of respiratory tract infections among patients with diabetes (OR 1.35, 95% C.I. 1.3-1.4).

Not only does DM increase the risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization, but it also appears to adversely affect its outcome with increased in-hospital mortality.2 Among patients with type 2 DM,  excess mortality has also been reported at 30 days, 90 days and 1 year following hospitalization for pneumonia. 4,5 More specifically, compared to controls with CAP, 1 year mortality of patients with DM was 30% (vs 17%) in 1 study. 4

Potential reasons for the higher incidence of pneumonia among patients with DM include increased risk of aspiration (eg, in the setting of gastroparesis, decreased cough reflex), impaired immunity (eg, chemotaxis, intracellular killing), pulmonary microangiopathy and coexisting morbidity. 1,3,5,6

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that worldwide DM has reached epidemic levels, such that if DM were a nation, it would surpass the U.S. as the 3rd most populous country! 7

If you liked this post, sign up under MENU and catch future fresh pearls straight into your mailbox!

References

  1. Kornum JB, Thomsen RW, RUS A, et al. Diabetes, glycemic control, and risk of hospitalization with pneumonia. A population-based case-control study. Diabetes Care 2008;31:1541-45. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17595354
  2. Martins M, Boavida JM, Raposo JF, et al. Diabetes hinders community-acquired pneumonia outcomes in hospitalized patients. BMJ Open Diabetes Research and Care 2016;4:e000181.doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2015000181. https://drc.bmj.com/content/4/1/e000181
  3. Abu-Ahour W, Twells L, Valcour J, et al. The association between diabetes mellitus and incident infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ Open Diabetes Research and Care 2017;5:e000336. https://drc.bmj.com/content/5/1/e000336. 
  4. Falcone M, Tiseo G, Russo A, et al. Hospitalization for pneumonia is associated with decreased 1-year survival in patients with type 2 diabetes. Results from a prospective cohort study. Medicine 2016;95:e2531. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26844461
  5. Kornum JB, Thomsen RW, Rus A, et al. Type 2 diabetes and pneumonia outcomes. A population-based cohort study. Diabetes Care 2007;30:2251-57. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17595354
  6. Koziel H, Koziel MJ. Pulmonary complications of diabetes mellitus. Pneumonia. Infect Dis Clin North Am 1995;9:65-96. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7769221
  7. Zimmet PZ. Diabetes and its drivers: the largest epidemic in human history? Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology 2017;3:1 https://clindiabetesendo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40842-016-0039-3  

 

My patient with diabetes mellitus is now admitted with pneumonia. Does diabetes increase the risk of pneumonia requiring hospitalization?