“I go after Streptococcus pneumoniae and many other bacteria causing community-acquired pneumonia with vengeance but lately I have had a hard time keeping up with many gram-negatives, including some E. coli. Who am I?”

Additional hint: “The latest FDA warning against the use of my class of drugs has to do with increased risk of ruptures or tears in the aorta in certain patients, including the elderly and those with hypertension, aortic aneurysm or peripheral vascular disease.” 

Editor’s note: This post is part of the P4P “Talking Therapeutics” series designed to make learning about antibiotics fun. Individual antibiotics give a short description of themselves and you are asked to guess their names. Antimicrobial spectrum, common uses and potential adverse effects follow. Enjoy!

And the answer is…… HERE

Selected antimicrobial spectrum

                Gram-positives: Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus                         (some resistance even in MSSA), Enterococcus spp (urine;some resistance)

                Gram-negatives: Enterics (eg, E. coli, Klebsiella spp), Pseudomonas spp,                                 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, H. influenzae, some ESBLs.

                 AVOID: MRSA, anaerobes

Common clinical uses: community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), healthcare-associated pneumonia (HAP), urinary tract infections (UTIs), legionnaire’s disease, abdominal infection (plus anaerobic coverage)

WATCH OUT! QT prolongation, C. difficile, central nervous system toxicity, seizures, myasthenia gravis, peripheral neuropathy, tendinopathy, drug interactions (eg. warfarin), and most recently aortic aneurysm diagnosis/dissection!

Remember the key features of levofloxacin before you prescribe it!

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.

Selected references

  1. FDA. FDA warns about increased risk of ruptures or tears in the aorta blood vessel with fluoroquinolone antibiotics in certain patients.  https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-warns-about-increased-risk-ruptures-or-tears-aorta-blood-vessel-fluoroquinolone-antibiotics. Accessed Nov 26, 2020,.
  2. Marangon FB, Miller D, Muallem MS, et al. Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin resistance among methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus isolates from keratitis and conjunctivitis. Am J Ophthal 2004;137:453-58. https://www.ajo.com/article/S0002-9394(03)01287-X/pdf
  3. Yasufuku T, Shigemura K, Shirakawa T, et al. Mechanisms of and risk factors for fluoroquinolone resistance in clinical Enterococcus faecalis from patients with urinary tract infections. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:3912-16. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3209098/
  4.  Rawla P, Helou MLE, Vellipuram AR. Fluoroquinolones and the risk of aortic aneurysm or aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Hematol Agents Med Chem 2019;17:3-10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6865049/

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

“I go after Streptococcus pneumoniae and many other bacteria causing community-acquired pneumonia with vengeance but lately I have had a hard time keeping up with many gram-negatives, including some E. coli. Who am I?”

How effective are face masks in reducing transmission of Covid-19?

Overall, review of data to date suggests that face masks are quite effective in reducing the transmission of coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A Lancet 2020 meta-analysis involving over 12,000 subjects, found that transmission of coronaviruses (SARS-CoV-2, SARS and MERS) was reduced with face masks by 85% (adjusted O.R. 0.15, 95%CI 0.07-0.34).1

More specific to Covid-19, a study from Mass General Brigham hospitals found a significant drop in healthcare worker (HCW) SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate from 21.3% to 11.5% following adoption of universal masking of HCWs and patients.2

An U.S. epidemiologic survey of 2,930 unique counties plus New York City found mandating face mask use in public was associated with a significant decline in the daily Covid-19 growth rate. 3 It was estimated that more than 200,000 Covid-19 cases were averted by May 22, 2020 as a result of the implementation of these mandates.

Another 2020 meta-analysis involving 21 studies reported an overall efficacy of masks (including surgical and N-95 masks) of 80% in healthcare workers and 47% in non-healthcare workers for respiratory virus transmission (including SARS, SARS-CoV-2 and influenza).4

A criticism of above reports has been their primarily retrospective nature. A randomized-controlled Danish study found a statistically insignificant 20% reduction in incident SARS-CoV-2 infection among mask wearers (5,6).    Despite its randomized-controlled design, this study had several limitations, including relatively low transmission rate in the community and lack of universal mask wearing in public during the study period. In addition, less than one-half of participants in the mask group reported adherence to wearing masks, and there was no assurance that masks were worn correctly when they did wear them. 

At most, this study suggests that it’s not enough for the uninfected to wear masks; the infected—often with little or no symptoms— should also wear them to help curb the pandemic.

So please do your part and tell your friends and family members to do the same by masking up while we are at war with Covid-19!

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that universal wearing of masks in the public in response to a respiratory virus pandemic is nothing new?  It was adopted as far back as 100 years ago during the 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic!

References

  1. Chu DK, Akl EA, Duda S, et al. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2020;395: 1973-87. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9.pdf
  2. Wang X, Ferro EG, Zhou G, et al. Association between universal masking in a health care system and SARS-CoV-2 positivity among health care workers. JAMA 2020;324:703-4. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768533
  3. Lyu W, Wehby GL. Community use of face masks and COVID-19: evidence from a natural experiment of state mandates in the US. Health Affairs 2020;39: July 16. https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00818
  4. Liang M, Gao L, Cheng Ce, et al. Efficacy of face mask in preventing respiratory virus transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Travel Med Infect Dis 2020;36:1-8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32473312/ 
  5. Bundgaard H, Bundgaard JS, Tadeusz DE, et al. Effectiveness of adding a mask recommendation to other public health measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in Danish mask wearers. Ann Intern Med 2020; November 18. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33205991/
  6. Frieden TR Cash-Goldwasser S. Of masks and methods. Ann Intern Med 2020; November 18. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/m20-7499

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.

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

How effective are face masks in reducing transmission of Covid-19?

How does iron overload increase the risk of infection?

Iron overload, either primary (eg, hereditary hemochromatosis) or secondary (eg, hemolysis/frequent transfusion states), may increase the risk of infections through at least 2 mechanisms: 1. Enhancement of the virulence of the pathogen; and 2. Interference with the body’s normal defense system.1-7

Excess iron has been reported to enhance the growth of numerous organisms, ranging from bacteria (eg, Yersinia, Shigella, Vibrio, Listeria, Legionella, Ehrlichia, many other Gram-negative bacteria, staphylococci, streptococci), mycobacteria, fungi (eg, Aspergillus, Rhizopus/Mucor, Cryptococcus, Pneumocystis), protozoa (eg, Entamaeba, Plasmodium, Toxoplasma) and viruses (HIV, hepatitis B/C, cytomegalovirus, parvovirus). 1-7

In addition to enhancing the growth of many pathogens, excess iron may also inhibit macrophage and lymphocyte function and neutrophil chemotaxis .1,2 Iron loading of macrophages results in the inhibition of interferon-gamma mediated pathways and loss of their ability to kill intracellular pathogens such as Legionella, Listeria and Ehrlichia. 2

Not surprisingly, there are numerous reports in the literature of infections in hemochromatosis, including Listeria monocytogenes meningitis, E. Coli septic shock, Yersinia enterocolitica sepsis/liver abscess, Vibrio vulnificus shock (attributed to ingestion of raw oysters) and mucormycosis causing periorbital cellulitis. 2

Bonus pearl: Did you know that the ascitic fluid of patients with cirrhosis has low transferrin levels compared to those with malignancy, potentially enhancing bacterial growth and increasing their susceptibility to spontaneous bacterial peritonitis? 8

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. Weinberg ED, Weinberg GA. The role of iron in infection. Curr Opin Infect Dis 1995;8:164-69. https://journals.lww.com/co-infectiousdiseases/abstract/1995/06000/the_role_of_iron_in_infection.4.aspx
  2. Khan FA, Fisher MA, Khakoo RA. Association of hemochromatosis with infectious diseases: expanding spectrum. Intern J Infect Dis 2007;11:482-87. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971207000811
  3. Thwaites PA, Woods ML. Sepsis and siderosis, Yersinia enterocolitica and hereditary haemochromatosis. BMJ Case Rep 2017. Doi:10.11336/bvr-206-218185. https://casereports.bmj.com/content/2017/bcr-2016-218185
  4. Weinberg ED. Iron loading and disease surveillance. Emerg Infect Dis 1999;5:346-52. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/5/3/99-0305-t3
  5. Matthaiou EI, Sass G, Stevens DA, et al. Iron: an essential nutrient for Aspergillus fumigatus and a fulcrum for pathogenesis. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2018;31:506-11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6579532/
  6. Alexander J, Limaye AP, Ko CW, et al. Association of hepatic iron overload with invasive fungal infection in liver transplant recipients. Liver Transpl 12:1799-1804. https://aasldpubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/lt.20827
  7. Schmidt SM. The role of iron in viral infections. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed) 2020;25:893-911. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31585922/
  8. Romero A, Perez-Aurellao JL, Gonzalez-Villaron L et al. Effect of transferrin concentration on bacterial growth in human ascetic fluid from cirrhotic and neoplastic patients. J Clin Invest 1993;23:699-705. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1365-2362.1993.tb01289.x

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

How does iron overload increase the risk of infection?

Can I use fist bump when I greet my patients or coworkers in the hospital?

Fist bump may be a safer practice than handshake with respect to transfer of potential pathogens but should not be considered a “safe”’ alternative. Studies to date have demonstrated transfer of bacteria even with fist bump, albeit often at lower counts. 1-3

In an experimental study involving healthcare workers in a hospital,1 fist bump was still associated with bacterial colonization, albeit at levels 4 times less than that of palmar surfaces following handshakes. Smaller contact surface area and reduced total contact time were thought to contribute to lower risk of bacterial transfer via fist bump.

In another experiment involving E. coli, fist bump was associated with ~75% less transfer of bacteria relative to “moderate handshake”.2

Interestingly, in a 2020 study of 50 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-colonized patients,3 the rate of MRSA isolated from the fist after a fist bump was not significantly lower than that of the dorsal surface of the hand after a handshake (16% vs 22%, P=0.6).  

In contrast, “cruise tap”, defined as contact between 2 knuckles alone, may be safer than fist bump. In the MRSA study above, cruise tap was associated with significantly lower rate of bacterial transfer compared to handshakes (8% vs 22%, P=0.02).3

Even a safer alternative is to avoid skin-to-skin contact altogether by using elbow bump, or no “bump” at all, particularly in the Covid-19 era!

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. Ghareeb PA, Bourlai T, Dutton W, et al. Reducing pathogen transmission in a hospital setting. Handshake verses fist bump: a pilot study. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24144553/
  2. Mela S, Withworth DE. The fist bump: A more hygienic alternative to the handshake. Am J Infect Control 2014;42:916-7. http://www.apic.org/Resource_/TinyMceFileManager/Fist_bump_article_AJIC_August_2014.pdf
  3. Pinto-Herrera NC, Jones LD, Ha W, et al. Transfer of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by first bump versus handshake. Infect Control Hospital Epidemiology 2020;41:962-64. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32456719/

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Can I use fist bump when I greet my patients or coworkers in the hospital?

How often is Covid-19 in hospitalized patients complicated by bacterial infection?

Despite frequent use of empiric antibiotics in hospitalized patients with Covid-19,current data suggests a low rate of documented bacterial co-infection (BCI) in such patients. In fact, the overall reported rate of BCI in hospitalized patients with Covid-19 is generally no greater than 10%.1-3   It’s quite likely that most patients with Covid-19 and chest radiograph changes solely have a coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) lung infection,4 particularly early in the course of the disease.  

A meta-analysis involving 30 studies (primarily retrospective) found that overall 7% of hospitalized Covid-19 patients had a laboratory-confirmed BCI with higher proportion among ICU patients (14%).Mycoplasma pneumoniae was the most common (42% of BCIs), followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and H. influenzae.  Notably, diagnosis of M. pneumoniae infection was based on antibody testing for IgM, which has been associated with false-positive results. Other caveats include lack of a uniform definition of respiratory tract infection among studies and potential impact of concurrent or prior antibiotic therapy on the yield of bacteriologic cultures. 5,6

A low prevalence of BCI was also found in a UK study involving 836 hospitalized Covid-19 patients: 3.2% for early BCI (0-5 days after admission) and 6.1% throughout hospitalization, including hospital-acquired infections.Staphylococcus aureus was the most common respiratory isolate among community-acquired cases, while Pseudomonas spp. was the predominant healthcare associated respiratory isolate.  Similarly, S. aureus. and Streptococcus pneumoniae were the most commonly isolated organisms from blind bronchoalveolar lavage of critically ill patients with Covid-19 during their first 5 days of admission, while gram-negative bacilli became dominant later during the hospitalization.8

The discordance between high rates of antibiotic treatment and confirmed bacterial co-infection in Covid-19 patients is likely a reflection of the difficulty in distinguishing Covid-19 pneumonia from bacterial pneumonia based on clinical or radiographic findings alone.

We need better tests to help distinguish bacterial vs Covid-19 pneumonia. Some have suggested using a low serum procalcitonin to help guide the withholding of or early discontinuation of antibiotics, especially in less severe Covid-19 cases. Formal studies of the accuracy of procalcitonin in Covid-19 are needed to test this hypothesis, given its suboptimal sensitivity in bacterial community-acquired pneumonia. 

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.

 

Reference

  1. Stevens RW, Jensen K, O’Horo JC, et al. Antimicrobial prescribing practices at a tertiary-care center in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 across the continuum of care. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiology 2020. https://reference.medscape.com/medline/abstract/32703323
  2. Lansbury L, Lim B, Baskaran V, et al. Co-infections in people with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect 2020;81:266-75. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32473235/
  3. Rawson TM, Moore LSP, Zhu N. Bacterial and fungal co-infection in individuals with coronavirus: A rapid review to support COVID-19 antimicrobial prescribing. Clin Infect Dis 2020 (Manuscrpit published online ahead of print 2 June ). Doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa530.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32358954/
  4. Metlay JP, Waterer GW. Treatment of community-acquired pneumonia during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Ann Intern Med 2020; 173:304-305. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32379883/
  5. Chang CY, Chan KG. Underestimation of co-infections in COVID-19 due to non-discriminatory use of antibiotics. J Infect 2020;81:e29-30. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32628960/
  6. Rawson TM, Moore LSP, Zhu N, et al. Bacterial pneumonia in COVID-19 critically ill patients: A case series. Reply letter. Clin Infect Dis 2020. https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-
  7. Hughes S, Troise O, Donaldson H, et al. Bacterial and fungal coinfection among hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study in a UK secondary-care setting. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020. https://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(20)30369-4/fulltext
  8. Dudoignon E, Camelena F, Deniau B, et al. Bacterial pneumonia in COVID-19 critically ill patients: A case series. Clin Infect Dis 2020. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7337703/

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

How often is Covid-19 in hospitalized patients complicated by bacterial infection?

Could my patient with acute dysuria and less than 10,000 E. coli/ml on urine culture still have a urinary tract infection (UTI)?

Absolutely! Although historically ≥100,000 bacteria/ml has been used as a criterion for UTI based on studies of women with pyelonephritis in the 1950s,1 several studies have since found that this criterion may not be met in up to 50% of symptomatic patients with UTI. 2-6 A lower criterion of 100-1,000 bacteria/ml of urine increases the sensitivity of urine culture to ~90% or more for diagnosis of UTI (albeit with lower specificity). 2-5

A 1982 NEJM study involving UTIs due to coliforms in acutely dysuric women found that the traditional count of ≥100,000 bacteria/ml in midstream urine missed ~50% of cases based on positive bladder cultures. 2 Similarly a 2013 NEJM study reported that 40% of women with symptomatic UTI would be missed if the ≥100,000 bacteria/ml criterion for midstream urine is used. 3

Among symptomatic men, 32% have been found to have <100,000 bacteria/ml in their midstream urine 4 and a single urine specimen by urethral catheterization growing ≥ 100 bacteria/ml is consistent with bacteriuria for both men and women. 5

Since most of these studies have involved UTI caused by E. coli or other coliforms, more data are needed to find out if the same findings apply to non-coliform urinary pathogens.

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that because quantitative urine culture results are concentration dependent (ie, “per ml”), a dilute urine—as may be found in patients experiencing diuresis—will result in lower numbers of bacteria/ ml. 5

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. Kass EH. Asymptomatic infections of the urinary tract. Trans Assoc Am Physicians 1958;69:56-74. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13380946/
  2. Stamm WE, Counts GW, Running KR, et al. Diagnosis of coliform infection in acutely dysuric women. N Engl J Med 1982;307:463-8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7099208/
  3. Hooten TM, Roberts PL, Cox ME, et al. Voided midstream urine culture and acute cystitis in premenopausal women. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1883-91. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1302186
  4. Lipsky BA, Ireton RC, Fihn SD, et al. Diagnosis of bacteriuria in men: specimen collection and culture interpretation. J Infect Dis 1987;155:847-54. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3559288/
  5. Nicolle LE, Bradley S, Colgan R, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2005;40:643-54. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15714408/
  6. Roberts KB, Wald ER. The diagnosis of UTI: colony count criteria revisited. Pediatrics 2018;141:e20173239. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-3239

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Could my patient with acute dysuria and less than 10,000 E. coli/ml on urine culture still have a urinary tract infection (UTI)?

When should I consider systemic corticosteroids in my patient with Covid-19?

As of July 30, 2020, The National Institute of Health (NIH) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Guidelines Panel recommends using dexamethasone 6 mg per day for up to 10 days for the treatment of Covid-19 in patients who are mechanically ventilated (“Strong” recommendation based on 1 or more randomized trials) with a a less strong recommendation (“Moderate”) in those who require supplemental oxygen but who are not mechanically ventilated.1

These recommendations appear to primarily stem from a multicenter, open label randomized controlled trial of dexamethasone vs standard of care in hospitalized patients in United Kingdom, 2 with treated group receiving dexamethasone 6 mg IV or orally daily for 10 days or until hospital discharge (whichever came first).  Mortality at 28 days was significantly lower among patients on mechanical ventilation who received dexamethasone (29.3% vs 41.4%, rate ratio 0.64, 95% CI, 0.51-0.81) and in those receiving supplemental oxygen without mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs 26.2%). The risk of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation was also lower in the dexamethasone group. No significant difference in mortality was found in patients who did not require supplemental oxygen. 

Retrospective and case series studies have reported conflicting results on the efficacy of corticosteroid for the treatment of covid-19. 3-10 That’s why despite its limitations (open label, wide range of 02 supplementation, few patients receiving remdesvir), the randomized controlled trial discussed above should guide our decision making on the use of corticosteroids in patients with Covid-19.

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. NIH. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Guidelines. https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/immune-based-therapy/immunomodulators/corticosteroids/ Accessed August 6, 2020.
  2. Horby P, Lim WS, Emberson JR, et al. Dexamethasone in hospitalized patients with Covid-19—Preliminary report. N Engl J Med 2020; July 17, 2020. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2021436
  3. Keller MJ, Kitsis EA, Arora S, et al. Effect of systemic glucocorticoids on mortality or mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19. J Hosp Med 2020;15(8):489-493. https://www.journalofhospitalmedicine.com/jhospmed/article/225402/hospital-medicine/effect-systemic-glucocorticoidsmortalityor-mechanical
  4. Wang Y, Jiang W, He Q, et al. A retrospective cohort study of methylprednisolone therapy in severe patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2020;5(1):57. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32341331
  5. Wu C, Chen X, Cai Y, et al. Risk factors associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome and death in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA Intern Med. 2020. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32167524
  6. Corral L, Bahamonde A, Arnaiz delas Revillas F, et al. GLUCOCOVID: A controlled trial of methylprednisolone in adults hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. medRxiv. 2020. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.17.20133579v1
  7. Fadel R, Morrison AR, Vahia A, et al. Early short course corticosteroids in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Clin Infect Dis. 2020. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32427279
  8. Fernandez Cruz A, Ruiz-Antoran B, Munoz Gomez A, et al. Impact of glucocorticoid treatment in SARS-CoV-2 infection mortality: a retrospective controlled cohort study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2020. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32571831
  9. Yang Z, Liu J, Zhou Y, Zhao X, Zhao Q, Liu J. The effect of corticosteroid treatment on patients with coronavirus infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect. 2020;81(1):e13-e20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32283144

 10. Lu X, Chen T, Wang Y, Wang J, Yan F. Adjuvant corticosteroid therapy for critically ill patients with COVID-19. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):241. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32430057

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

 

When should I consider systemic corticosteroids in my patient with Covid-19?

My patient recently underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and is now found to have a Baker’s cyst. Is Baker’s cyst a postoperative complication of TKA?

Not likely! There is no evidence that TKA causes Baker’s cyst (also known as popliteal cyst). Instead, the finding of Baker’s cyst following TKA may be best explained by its well-known association with osteoarthritis, one of the main indications for TKA.1,6,7

In a study of 2025 patients who underwent primary TKA, 0.6% were diagnosed with Baker’s cysts within 6 weeks to 2 years postoperatively (75% symptomatic), but whether the cysts were present prior to TKA was unclear. There was no reported association between surgical technique or perioperative course and Baker’s cyst diagnosis.9

Actually, there might be a correlation between TKA and Baker’s cyst resolution.2,3 Among patients with known cysts preoperatively, 15% and 67% of patients may experience resolution of the cyst at 1 year and 4-6 years following surgery, respectively. 2,3

A Baker’s cyst is a fluid-filled pocket in the posterior aspect of the knee, typically seen in adults with degenerative changes in the patellofemoral joint, as may occur with meniscal tears and arthritis. When symptomatic, it can be treated non-operatively with ultrasound-guided aspiration and corticosteroid injection or operatively with surgical excision or attempted repair of the underlying defect. 4,8

 

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that the ‘crescent sign’ (bruising below the medial malleolus associated with fluid from ruptured cyst moving inferiorly toward the ankle) was first described in 1976 and may help distinguish calf pain due to Baker’s cyst from that of deep venous thrombophlebitis? 5

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.

 Contributed by Anamika Veeramani, Medical Student, Harvard Medical School

 

References

  1. Guermazi A., Hayashi D., Roemer F, et al. Cyst-like lesions of the knee joint and their relation to incident knee pain and development of radiographic osteoarthritis: The MOST study. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2010; 18:1386-1392. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2010.08.015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20816978/
  2. Hommel H., Becker R., Fennema P., et al. (2020). The fate of Baker’s cysts at mid-term follow-up after total knee arthroplasty. The Bone & Joint Journal, 2020;102-B(1):132-136. doi:10.1302/0301-620x.102b1.bjj-2019-0273.r2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31888367/
  3. Hommel, H., Perka, C., Kopf, S. The fate of Baker’s cyst after total knee arthroplasty. The Bone & Joint Journal 2016;98-B(9):1185-1188. doi:10.1302/0301-620x.98b9.37748. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27587518/
  4. Leib AD, Roshan A, Foris LA, et al. Baker’s Cyst. [Updated 2020 Mar 16]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2020 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430774/
  5. Mizumoto, J. The crescent sign of ruptured baker’s cyst. Journal of General Family Medicine, 2019;20(5): 215-216. doi: 10.1002/jgf2.261. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6732489/
  6. Rupp, S., Seil, R., Jochum, P., & Kohn, D. Popliteal Cysts in Adults. The American Journal of Sports Medicine 2002; 30(1): 112-115. doi:10.1177/03635465020300010401. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11799006/
  7. Sansone, V., Ponti, A. D., Paluello, G. M., & Maschio, A. D. Popliteal cysts and associated disorders of the knee. International Orthopaedics 1995;19(5): 275-279. doi:10.1007/bf00181107. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8567131/
  8. Smith, M., Lesniak, B., Baraga, M., Kaplan, L., Jose, J. Treatment of Popliteal (Baker) Cysts with Ultrasound-Guided Aspiration, Fenestration and Injection: Long-term Follow-up. Sports Health 2015; 7(5): 409-414. doi: 10.1177/1941738115585520. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547114/
  9. Tofte, J. N., Holte, A. J., & Noiseaux, N. Popliteal (Baker’s) Cysts in the Setting of Primary Knee Arthroplasty. The Iowa Orthopedic Journal 2017;37:177-180. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28852354/

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

My patient recently underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and is now found to have a Baker’s cyst. Is Baker’s cyst a postoperative complication of TKA?

Is intermittent pneumatic compression effective in reducing the risk of deep vein thrombosis in non-surgical hospitalized patients at high risk of major bleed?

The weight of the evidence to date suggests that intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is effective in reducing the risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in hospitalized patients with stroke. 1,2 Whether IPC is also effective in non-surgical hospitalized patients without stroke at high risk of DVT and major bleed needs further studies.

A 2013 multicenter randomized trial (CLOTS 3) involving over 2,000 immobile hospitalized patients post-stroke found a significantly lower risk of DVT in proximal veins or any symptomatic DVT in the proximal veins within 30 days of randomization (8.5% vs 12.1%; absolute reduction risk 3.6%, 95% C.I. 1.4-5.8). Of note, the rate of concurrent heparin or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) prophylaxis was similar between the 2 groups (17%). 1

A meta-analysis including the CLOTS 3 study and 2 other smaller trials 2 in patients with stroke found a risk reduction for proximal DVT (O.R. 0.66, 95% C.I 0.52-0.84) with nearly significant reduction in deaths by the end of the treatment period (O.R. 0.81, 95% 0.65-1.01).1

Although IPC may also be effective in non-surgical hospitalized patients without stroke but at high risk of DVT and bleed, proper trials in this patient population is lacking. In fact, the 2012 American College of Chest Physicians guidelines on antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis classifies use of IPC in preventing DVT’s in non-surgical acutely ill hospitalized patients as category 2C recommendation (weak, low quality evidence). 3

The patient population and methodology of above studies should be distinguished from those of a 2019 published trial involving only critically ill patients—all receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis—which reported no reduction in the incidence of proximal lower-limb DVT with the addition of IPC. 4

 

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that venous thromboembolism has been reported in up to 42% of hospitalized patients who have had a stroke? 1

 

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. Dennis M, Sandercock P, Reid J, et al. Effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression in reduction of risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients who have had a stroke (CLOTS 3): a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2013;382:516-24. https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61050-8/attachment/1a0438d2-86eb-4da1-8bdb-92c0aec18b8d/mmc1.pdf
  2. Naccarato M, Chiodo Grandi F, Dennis M, et al. Physical methods for preventing deep vein thrombosis in stroke. Cochrance Database Syst Rev 2010;8:CD001922. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001922.pub3/full
  3. Guyatt GH, Akl EA, Crowther M, et al. Executive summary: Antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. CHEST 2012;141 (suppl):7S-47S. http://www.sphcs.org/workfiles/CardiacVascular/7S-full.pdf
  4. Arabi YM, Al-Hameed F, Burns KEA, et al. Adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression for venous thromboprophylaxis. N Engl J Med 2019;380:1305-15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30779530/

 

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Is intermittent pneumatic compression effective in reducing the risk of deep vein thrombosis in non-surgical hospitalized patients at high risk of major bleed?

What’s the role of small droplets or aerosolized particles in the transmission of Covid-19?

Although transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is often considered to occur through large respiratory droplets by coughing or sneezing, emerging data suggests that smaller respiratory particles (5 microns or less) generated by breathing, speaking or singing also account for a sizeable number of infections. Several lines of evidence make a cogent argument for aerosols serving as an important mode of transmission for SARS-CoV-2. 1-9

 First, there are ample accounts of SARS-CoV-2 spreading by being near an infected individual without symptoms.  Since by definition, those without symptoms do not cough or sneeze transmission must have occurred through other means, including breathing, talking or touching surfaces that might have become secondarily contaminated through aerosol.1,2,5  To make matters worse, the peak of contagion in infected individuals occurs on or before symptoms occur.1

Second, aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to remain viable in the air for at least 3 hours and viral RNA (not necessarily viable virus) has been found in the air outside patient rooms and inside patient rooms in the absence of cough.2,9 One study found SARS-CoV-2 in outdoor air at a hospital entrance and in front of a department store.7

Third, contaminated air samples and long-range aerosol transport and transmission have been reported by several studies involving a related coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, the agent of SARS.2

What’s the ramifications of aerosol transmission of Covid-19? The most obvious is the requirement for universal wearing of masks or face covers in public spaces even when 6 feet apart. This practice is particularly important indoors where the amount of ventilation, number of people, duration of stay in the facility, and airflow direction may impact the risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2.1

The other potential ramification of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 is that due to their smaller size, these virus-laden particles may bypass the upper respiratory tract and be inhaled directly into the lungs resulting in more severe disease.4  So it really makes sense to routinely wear a mask when out in public places.

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that 1 minute of loud speaking could generate over 1000 virus-containing aerosols in the air with a “super-emitter” generating over 100,000 virus particles in their droplets during the same time?1

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. Prather KA, Wang CC, Schooley RT. Reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Science. May 27, 2020.
  2. Anderson EL, Turnham P, Griffin JR, et al. Consideration of the aerosol transmission for COVID-19 and public health. Risk Analysis 2020;40:902-7.
  3. Hamner L, Dubbel P, Capron I, et al. High SARS-CoV-2 attack rate following exposure at a choir practice-Skagit County, Washington, March 2020. MMWR 2020; 69: 606-10.
  4. Gralton J, Tovey E, McLaws ML, et al. The role of particle size in aerosolized pathogen transmission: a review. J Infect 2011;62:1-13.
  5. Asadi S, Bouvier N, Wexler AS et al. The coronavirus pandemic and aerosols: does COVID-19 transmit via expiratory particles. Aerosol Sci Technol 2020;54:635-38.
  6. Morawska L, Cao J. Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2: the world should face the reality. Env International 2020;139:105730.
  7. Liu Y, Ning Z, Chen Y, e al. Aerodynamic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in two Wuhan hospitals. Nature 2020;582:557-60. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2271-3.pdf
  8. Somsen GA, van Rijn C, Kooij S, et al. Small droplet aerosols in poorly ventilated spaces and SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Lancet Respir Med 2020; May 27. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7255254/pdf/main.pdf

9. Santarpia JL, Rivera DN, Herrera V, et al. Transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 in viral shedding observed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. 2020 (Preprint) https://www.ehs.ucsb.edu/files/docs/bs/Transmission_potential_of_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

What’s the role of small droplets or aerosolized particles in the transmission of Covid-19?