Literature DB >> 32535894

Bloodstream infections in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Daniele Roberto Giacobbe1,2, Denise Battaglini3, Lorenzo Ball3,4, Iole Brunetti3, Bianca Bruzzone5, Giulia Codda4, Francesca Crea6, Andrea De Maria1,2, Chiara Dentone1, Antonio Di Biagio1,2, Giancarlo Icardi2,5, Laura Magnasco1,2, Anna Marchese4,6, Malgorzata Mikulska1,2, Andrea Orsi2,5, Nicolò Patroniti3,4, Chiara Robba3, Alessio Signori2, Lucia Taramasso1,2, Antonio Vena1, Paolo Pelosi3,4, Matteo Bassetti1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the incidence and risk of intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired bloodstream infections (BSI) in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, single-centre study was conducted in Northern Italy. The primary study objectives were as follows: (a) to assess the incidence rate of ICU-acquired BSI and (b) to assess the cumulative risk of developing ICU-acquired BSI.
RESULTS: Overall, 78 critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included in the study. Forty-five episodes of ICU-acquired BSI were registered in 31 patients, with an incidence rate of 47 episodes (95% confidence interval [CI] 35-63) per 1000 patient-days at risk. The estimated cumulative risk of developing at least one BSI episode was of almost 25% after 15 days at risk and possibly surpassing 50% after 30 days at risk. In multivariable analysis, anti-inflammatory treatment was independently associated with the development of BSI (cause-specific hazard ratio [csHR] 1.07 with 95% CI 0.38-3.04 for tocilizumab, csHR 3.95 with 95% CI 1.20-13.03 for methylprednisolone and csHR 10.69 with 95% CI 2.71-42.17 for methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab, with no anti-inflammatory treatment as the reference group; overall P for the dummy variable = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence rate of BSI was high, and the cumulative risk of developing BSI increased with ICU stay. Further study will clarify if the increased risk of BSI we detected in COVID-19 patients treated with anti-inflammatory drugs is outweighed by the benefits of reducing any possible pro-inflammatory dysregulation induced by SARS-CoV-2.
© 2020 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BSI; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus; steroid; tocilizumab

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32535894      PMCID: PMC7323143          DOI: 10.1111/eci.13319

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Invest        ISSN: 0014-2972            Impact factor:   5.722


BACKGROUND

In a very few months, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has become pandemic, and several countries worldwide are currently dealing with unprecedented epidemic foci of severe acute respiratory infection, a possible presentation of COVID‐19 that may require intensive care unit (ICU) admission and carries a high case fatality rate. , , , , While the demographics, clinical characteristics and overall survival of patients with COVID‐19 admitted to ICU have been already extensively characterized by large reports from several parts of the word, little is still known about nonviral infectious complications such as bacterial or fungal bloodstream infections (BSI) that may participate in adversely influencing the outcome of any ICU‐admitted patient. , In the present study, we aimed to retrospectively assess the incidence rate, cumulative risk, predictors and survival of ICU‐acquired BSI in patients with COVID‐19 admitted to two ICUs in a large teaching hospital in Northern Italy, one of the most affected areas in Europe to date.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in two ICUs (27 and 12 beds, respectively) at Ospedale Policlinico San Martino—IRCCS, a 1200‐bed teaching hospital in Northern Italy. From 20 February to 10 April 2020, all patients with COVID‐19 admitted to the participating ICUs for >48 hours were included in the study. The predefined primary study objectives were as follows: (a) to assess the incidence rate of ICU‐acquired BSI and (b) to assess the cumulative risk of developing ICU‐acquired BSI. Predefined secondary objectives were as follows: (a) to describe the clinical characteristics of ICU‐acquired BSI; (b) to assess predictors of ICU‐acquired BSI; and (c) to describe survival of ICU‐acquired BSI. The collection of anonymized data for the present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Liguria Region (registry number 163/2020). Specific informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study. Reporting of the study conforms to broad EQUATOR guidelines.

Definitions

COVID‐19 was defined in the presence of a positive real‐time polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) for SARS‐CoV‐2 on at least one respiratory specimen (nasopharyngeal swab, sputum and/or lower respiratory tract specimens). ICU‐acquired BSI was defined in the presence of at least one positive blood culture for bacteria or fungi, drawn at >48 hours after ICU admission. For coagulase‐negative staphylococci and other common skin contaminants, at least two consecutive blood cultures positive for the same pathogen were necessary to define BSI. In patients with multiple blood cultures positive for the same organism, novel BSI events were considered as independent if occurring at least 30 days after the last previous positive blood culture. Polymicrobial infections were considered as separate BSI events, one for each causative organism isolated from blood culture.

Data collection

The following data were collected from the patients’ electronic medical records as baseline data at the time of ICU admission: age in years, gender, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, respiratory disease (defined as asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), end‐stage renal disease (defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m2), moderate‐to‐severe liver disease (defined as compensated or decompensated liver cirrhosis), solid cancer, haematological malignancy, human immunodeficiency virus infection, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score at ICU admission and antibiotic therapy (yes/no and type of administered antibiotic/s). Since they were constantly continued/started at ICU admission, possible off‐label anti‐inflammatory treatments for COVID‐19 (steroid treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone at 1 mg/kg once daily and/or intravenous tocilizumab at 8 mg/kg single administration or repeated once) were also recorded as dichotomic baseline variables (steroid: yes/no; tocilizumab: yes/no). The following data were collected related to the onset of BSI episodes (ie they were collected the day when the first positive blood culture was drawn): presence of fever (defined as temperature >37.3°C), requirement of vasoactive agents, presence of acute kidney injury (defined as at least stage 1 of KDIGO [Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes] classification of acute kidney injury ), source of BSI (defined according to CDC/NHSN criteria ), blood neutrophil count in cells × 10−3/mm3, blood platelet count in cells × 10−3/mm3, serum fibrinogen in g/L, serum lactate in mmol/L, serum C‐reactive protein in mg/L, serum procalcitonin in ng/mL, causative agents of BSI and susceptibility test results (the VITEK‐2 automated system, bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France, was used for isolate identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing). Finally, the date of the following was collected, whichever came first: death in the ICU and discharge from the ICU.

Statistical analysis

No sample size calculations were performed a priori for this exploratory, descriptive study. The incidence rate of ICU‐acquired BSI in the study population was calculated as the number of events per 1000 patient‐days at risk (defined as the cumulative days of stay elapsed from 48 hours after ICU admission to death, discharge from ICU or end of the study period, whichever came first). The 95% confidence interval (CI) for the incidence rate estimate was obtained using the mid‐P exact test. The cumulative risk of ICU‐acquired BSI was calculated using the Aalen‐Johansen method, considering the first occurring BSI as the event of interest, death and discharge from the ICU as competing events, and length of ICU stay equal to 30 days or end of the study period (10 Apr 2020) as right‐censoring events. The time of origin was set at 48 hours after ICU admission. With regard to secondary analyses, demographic and clinical characteristics of BSI episodes were summarized with number and percentages for categorical variables and with median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous variables. The possible association of demographic and clinical variables with the development of BSI (dependent variable: first occurring ICU‐acquired BSI) was first tested in univariable Cox regression models for estimating the unadjusted cause‐specific hazard ratio (csHR) for the development of BSI. Then, variables potentially associated with the development of BSI in univariable comparisons (P < .10) were included in a multivariable Cox regression model for calculating the adjusted csHR for the development of BSI. Finally, survival of patients with ICU‐acquired BSI was described with the Kaplan‐Meier method, with death as the event of interest and discharge from ICU or the end of the study period (10 Apr 2020) as right‐censoring events. The time of origin was the day when the first positive blood culture of the first occurring BSI episode was drawn. Statistical analyses were performed using R Statistical Software (version 3.6.0, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) and SPSS Statistics version 21.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

RESULTS

During the study period, 78 patients with COVID‐19 admitted to ICU for >48 hours were included in the study. Their median age was 66 years (IQR 57‐70), and 77% were males (60/78). Their baseline demographic and clinical characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Of them, 26% (20/78) died in the ICU, 29% (23/78) were discharged from the ICU, and 45% (35/78) were still hospitalized in the ICU at the end of the study period.
TABLE 1

Characteristics of 78 critically ill patients with COVID‐19

Variable

Total

78 (100)

Demographics
Age in years, median (IQR)66 (57‐70)
Male gender60 (77)
Comorbidities
Diabetes mellitus14 (18)
Hypertension35 (45)
Respiratory disease a 10 (13)
End‐stage renal disease b 0 (0)
Moderate/severe liver failure c 3 (4)
Solid cancer4 (5)
Haematological malignancy1 (1)
HIV infection0 (0)
Characteristics at ICU admission
Hospital stay before ICU admission in days, median (IQR)2 (0‐5)
SOFA score, median (IQR)4 (3‐5)
Antibiotic therapy d 75 (96)
Anti‐inflammatory treatment
Methylprednisolone24 (31)
Tocilizumab18 (23)
Both of them14 (18)
None of them22 (28)

Results are reported as number of patients (%) unless otherwise indicated.

Abbreviations: COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; ICU, intensive care unit; IQR, interquartile range; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment.

Defined as asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m2

Defined as compensated or decompensated liver cirrhosis

Ceftaroline (n = 59), levofloxacin (n = 3), ceftobiprole (n = 2), ceftriaxone plus azithromycin (n = 2), linezolid plus meropenem (n = 2), ceftriaxone (n = 1), ceftolozane/tazobactam (n = 1), ceftaroline plus azithromycin (n = 1), piperacillin/tazobactam plus azithromycin (n = 1), ceftaroline plus meropenem plus tigecycline (n = 1), linezolid plus daptomycin plus ceftolozane/tazobactam (n = 1) and linezolid plus meropenem plus amikacin (n = 1)

Characteristics of 78 critically ill patients with COVID‐19 Total 78 (100) Results are reported as number of patients (%) unless otherwise indicated. Abbreviations: COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; ICU, intensive care unit; IQR, interquartile range; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment. Defined as asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m2 Defined as compensated or decompensated liver cirrhosis Ceftaroline (n = 59), levofloxacin (n = 3), ceftobiprole (n = 2), ceftriaxone plus azithromycin (n = 2), linezolid plus meropenem (n = 2), ceftriaxone (n = 1), ceftolozane/tazobactam (n = 1), ceftaroline plus azithromycin (n = 1), piperacillin/tazobactam plus azithromycin (n = 1), ceftaroline plus meropenem plus tigecycline (n = 1), linezolid plus daptomycin plus ceftolozane/tazobactam (n = 1) and linezolid plus meropenem plus amikacin (n = 1) Overall, 45 episodes of ICU‐acquired BSI were registered in 31 patients, with an incidence rate of 47 episodes (95% confidence interval [CI] 35‐63) per 1000 patient‐days at risk. The clinical and laboratory characteristics of the 45 episodes of ICU‐acquired BSI are detailed in Table 2. As shown in the table, the lowest prevalence of fever (6/16, 38%) was observed in COVID‐19 patients treated with tocilizumab, whereas the highest was observed in those receiving neither tocilizumab nor steroid (9/10, 90%). Serum C‐reactive protein values were also the lowest among tocilizumab‐treated patients (median 20.6 mg/L, IQR 8.4‐33.6 mg/L) and the highest among those receiving neither tocilizumab nor steroid (median 169 mg/L, IQR 70.4‐194.0 mg/L). The most frequent causative agents of ICU‐acquired BSI were coagulase‐negative staphylococci (11/45, 24%), followed by Enterococcus faecalis (8/45, 18%) and Staphylococcus aureus (6/45, 13%). As shown in Figure 1, the estimated cumulative risk of developing at least one ICU‐acquired BSI episode was of almost 25% after 15 days at risk and possibly surpassing 50% after 30 days a risk.
TABLE 2

Characteristics of 45 ICU‐acquired BSI episodes in 31 critically ill patients with COVID‐19

Total no of episodes (n = 45)Episodes in patients treated with tocilizumab (n = 16)Episodes in patients treated with steroid (n = 12)Episodes in patients treated with tocilizumab and steroid (n = 7)Episodes in patients treated with neither tocilizumab nor steroid (n = 10)
Fever (temperature > 37.3°C), n (%)24 (53)6 (38)5 (42)4 (57)9 (90)
Requirement of vasoactive agents, n (%)15 (33)5 (31)3 (25)1 (14)6 (60)
Acute kidney injury a 9 (2)2 (13)5 (42)0 (0)2 (20)
Source of BSI b
Unknown29 (64)6 (38)11 (92)3 (43)9 (90)
Lower respiratory tract10 (22)4 (25)1 (8)4 (57)1 (10)
Urinary tract2 (4)2 (13)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)
CVC‐related4 (9)4 (25)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)
Laboratory results
Blood neutrophil count, cell × 10‐3/mm3 10.8 (8.1‐14.8)8.9 (5.5‐14.7)13.4 (8.6‐16.0)12.4 (8.7‐16.0)10.4 (6.4‐14.5)
Blood platelet count, cell × 10‐3/mm3 247 (192‐332)234 (191‐355)260 (188‐445)208 (190‐300)244 (184‐294)
Serum lactate, mmol/L1.2 (0.8‐1.6)1.3 (1.0‐2.1)1.2 (0.8‐1.5)1.2 (0.7‐1.4)1.1 (0.6‐1.3)
Serum fibrinogen, g/L4.3 (2.7‐6.5)2.8 (2.2‐3.1)5.9 (4.3‐8.0)4.4 (2.1‐5.4)6.5 (4.3‐9.2)
Serum C‐reactive protein, mg/L44.6 (11.3‐137.0)20.6 (8.4‐33.6)105.2 (54.0‐164.0)43.7 (2.9‐120.0)169.0 (70.4‐194.0)
Serum procalcitonin0.3 (0.1‐1.2)0.1 (0.0‐0.3)0.9 (0.2‐2.3)0.1 (0.1‐0.2)1.2 (0.4‐1.9)
Causative agent, n (%)
Coagulase‐negative staphylococci11 (24)4 (25)4 (33)1 (14)2 (20)
Staphylococcus aureus c 6 (13)4 (25)1 (8)1 (14)0 (0)
Enterococcus faecalis d 8 (18)3 (19)2 (17)1 (14)2 (20)
Enterococcus faecium e 4 (9)2 (13)1 (8)1 (14)0 (0)
Streptococcus pneumoniae f 1 (2)0 (0)1 (8)0 (0)0 (0)
Viridans group streptococci3 (7)0 (0)1 (8)0 (0)2 (20)
Pseudomonas aeruginosa g 2 (4)0 (0)0 (0)1 (14)1 (10)
Enterobacter aerogenes h 4 (9)0 (0)1 (8)1 (14)2 (20)
Escherichia coli h 1 (2)1 (6)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)
Proteus mirabilis h 1 (2)0 (0)0 (0)1 (14)0 (0)
Candida spp. i 3 (7)2 (13)0 (0)0 (0)1 (0)
Prevotella spp.1 (2)0 (0)1 (8)0 (0)0 (0)

Results are reported as median (IQR) unless otherwise indicated.

Abbreviation: IQR, interquartile range.

Defined as at least stage 1 of KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) stages of acute kidney injury.

Defined according to CDC/NHSN criteria.

0/6 S aureus were methicillin‐resistant (0%).

0/8 E faecalis were ampicillin‐resistant (0%); none were vancomycin‐resistant (0%).

4/4 E faecium were ampicillin‐resistant (100%); 1/4 were vancomycin‐resistant (25%).

0/1 S pneumoniae were ceftriaxone‐resistant (0%).

0/2 P aeruginosa were piperacillin/tazobactam‐resistant, ceftazidime‐resistant and/or carbapenem‐resistant (0%).

2/6 members of the Enterobacterales were piperacillin/tazobactam‐resistant, ceftazidime‐resistant and/or carbapenem‐resistant (33%)

C albicans (n = 1), C tropicalis (n = 1), C parapsilosis (n = 1).

FIGURE 1

Cumulative risk of ICU‐acquired BSI in critically ill patients with COVID‐19. The cumulative risk of ICU‐acquired BSI in patients with COVID‐19 at different lengths of ICU stay was estimated using the Aalen‐Johansen method, with the first occurring ICU‐acquired BSI as the event of interest and death and discharge from the ICU as competing events. Right censoring was applied in the following cases: (a) persistent ICU stay at the end of the study period and (b) persistent ICU stay at day + 30 after the time of origin (defined as 48 h after ICU admission, see study methods). BSI, bloodstream infection; COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; ICU, intensive care unit

Characteristics of 45 ICU‐acquired BSI episodes in 31 critically ill patients with COVID‐19 Results are reported as median (IQR) unless otherwise indicated. Abbreviation: IQR, interquartile range. Defined as at least stage 1 of KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) stages of acute kidney injury. Defined according to CDC/NHSN criteria. 0/6 S aureus were methicillin‐resistant (0%). 0/8 E faecalis were ampicillin‐resistant (0%); none were vancomycin‐resistant (0%). 4/4 E faecium were ampicillin‐resistant (100%); 1/4 were vancomycin‐resistant (25%). 0/1 S pneumoniae were ceftriaxone‐resistant (0%). 0/2 P aeruginosa were piperacillin/tazobactam‐resistant, ceftazidime‐resistant and/or carbapenem‐resistant (0%). 2/6 members of the Enterobacterales were piperacillin/tazobactam‐resistant, ceftazidime‐resistant and/or carbapenem‐resistant (33%) C albicans (n = 1), C tropicalis (n = 1), C parapsilosis (n = 1). Cumulative risk of ICU‐acquired BSI in critically ill patients with COVID‐19. The cumulative risk of ICU‐acquired BSI in patients with COVID‐19 at different lengths of ICU stay was estimated using the Aalen‐Johansen method, with the first occurring ICU‐acquired BSI as the event of interest and death and discharge from the ICU as competing events. Right censoring was applied in the following cases: (a) persistent ICU stay at the end of the study period and (b) persistent ICU stay at day + 30 after the time of origin (defined as 48 h after ICU admission, see study methods). BSI, bloodstream infection; COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; ICU, intensive care unit Univariable and multivariable analyses of factors potentially associated with the development of ICU‐acquired BSI are shown in Table 3. In univariable comparisons, the following variables were associated with the development of BSI: diabetes mellitus (csHR 2.76 with 95% CI 1.09‐6.98, P = .032) and anti‐inflammatory treatment (csHR 1.21 with 95% CI 0.44‐3.30 for tocilizumab, csHR 4.48 with 95% CI 1.38‐14.56 for methylprednisolone and csHR 10.84 with 95% CI 2.79‐42.08 for methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab, with no anti‐inflammatory treatment as the reference group; overall p for the dummy variable = 0.002). In multivariable analysis, only anti‐inflammatory treatment (csHR 1.07 with 95% CI 0.38‐3.04 for tocilizumab, csHR 3.95 with 95% CI 1.20‐13.03 for methylprednisolone and csHR 10.69 with 95% CI 2.71‐42.17 for methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab; overall p for the dummy variable = 0.003) retained an independent association with the development of BSI.
TABLE 3

Univariable and multivariable analyses of risk factors for the development of ICU‐acquired BSI in critically ill patients with COVID‐19

VariableUnadjusted cause‐specific HR (95% CI) P Adjusted cause‐specific HR (95% CI) P
Age in years1.00 (0.96‐1.04).970
Male gender1.60 (0.65‐3.94).304
Diabetes mellitus2.76 (1.09‐6.98).0322.22 (0.80‐6.20).127
Hypertension0.89 (0.43‐1.85).755
Respiratory disease1.87 (0.54‐6.43).323
Moderate/severe liver failure6.71 (0.77‐58.29).0846.36 (0.59‐68.39).127
Solid cancer2.71 (0.35‐20.99).340
Haematological malignancy b
Hospital stay before ICU admission in days1.02 (0.98‐1.08).339
SOFA score1.00 (0.80‐1.25).996
Antibiotic therapy b
Anti‐inflammatory treatment
Methylprednisolone4.48 (1.38‐14.56).0023.95 (1.20‐13.03).003
Tocilizumab1.21 (0.44‐3.30)1.07 (0.38‐3.04)
Both of them10.84 (2.79‐42.08)10.69 (2.71‐42.17)
None of them(ref)(ref)

Abbreviations: CI, confidence intervals; COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; HR, hazard ratio; ICU, intensive care unit; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment.

The variables end‐stage renal disease and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection were not included in the model since they were not detected in the study population.

Univariable Cox regression model not converging in the presence of very small samples (n = 1 for patients with haematological malignancies and n = 3 for patients without antibiotic therapy at ICU admission)

Univariable and multivariable analyses of risk factors for the development of ICU‐acquired BSI in critically ill patients with COVID‐19 Abbreviations: CI, confidence intervals; COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; HR, hazard ratio; ICU, intensive care unit; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment. The variables end‐stage renal disease and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection were not included in the model since they were not detected in the study population. Univariable Cox regression model not converging in the presence of very small samples (n = 1 for patients with haematological malignancies and n = 3 for patients without antibiotic therapy at ICU admission) As shown in Figure 2, the estimated survival of ICU‐acquired BSI was of almost 75% after 24 days (no longer follow‐up was available) from the first positive blood culture, although with the important limitation that follow‐up after day 12 was available for less than one third of patients at the time of this report.
FIGURE 2

Survival of ICU‐acquired BSI in critically ill patients with COVID‐19. Survival of first occurring ICU‐acquired BSI in patients with COVID‐19 was estimated using the Kaplan‐Meier method. Right censoring was applied in the following cases: (a) discharge from the ICU and (b) persistent ICU stay at the end of the study period. The maximum registered follow‐up was of 24 d after the time of origin. The time of origin was defined as the day when the first positive blood culture of the first occurring BSI episode was drawn. BSI, bloodstream infection; COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; ICU, intensive care unit

Survival of ICU‐acquired BSI in critically ill patients with COVID‐19. Survival of first occurring ICU‐acquired BSI in patients with COVID‐19 was estimated using the Kaplan‐Meier method. Right censoring was applied in the following cases: (a) discharge from the ICU and (b) persistent ICU stay at the end of the study period. The maximum registered follow‐up was of 24 d after the time of origin. The time of origin was defined as the day when the first positive blood culture of the first occurring BSI episode was drawn. BSI, bloodstream infection; COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; ICU, intensive care unit

DISCUSSION

In the present study, we estimated an incidence rate of 47 episodes of ICU‐acquired BSI per 1000 patient‐days at risk in critically ill patients with COVID‐19, which is higher than that of 5‐19 episodes per 1000 patient‐days registered in other heterogeneous, non‐COVID‐19 ICU populations (even if adjusting for the fact that we considered only patient‐days after 48 hours from ICU admission, see Methods). , , , It is also of note that our estimation of a cumulative 30‐day risk of developing BSI of more than 50% is in contrast with the low prevalence of BSI or other bacterial/fungal infections (1%‐12%) reported in other epidemiological reports from China and the United States. , , In our opinion, this could be explained by different, nonmutually exclusive reasons. The first is that the number of patients under follow‐up in the ICU for more than 20 days was limited in our analysis; thus, any generalization of our 30‐day cumulative risk estimate should be made with due caution. On the other hand, the cumulative risk of almost 25% we estimated at day 15 (based on a larger portion of patients still under follow‐up) is already higher than the overall prevalence of BSI registered in critically ill COVID‐19 patients in earlier studies. , , In this regard, a possible explanation may be the difficulty of diagnosing BSI in patients receiving anti‐inflammatory drugs, which prompted us to collect blood cultures in any case of worsening general conditions in COVID‐19 patients, even in the absence of fever and increases in C‐reactive protein serum levels. In support of this approach, in the present study, for example, fever was detected only in 38% of patients with ICU‐acquired BSI previously treated with tocilizumab. Furthermore, serum C‐reactive protein levels were frequently low and other classical inflammatory markers were usually uncharacteristic, making it rather difficult to clinically recognize a BSI event. Therefore, we feel the total number of BSI in COVID‐19 patients may be underestimated wherever anti‐inflammatory drugs are administered, but collection of blood cultures remains based on classical clinical and laboratory indicators of BSI. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we found an independent association between receipt of anti‐inflammatory agents and development of BSI. This effect seems to be mainly driven by steroids rather than tocilizumab, although it is worth noting that the highest instantaneous risk in Cox models was registered in patients receiving both steroid and tocilizumab. In general, such an unfavourable effect of anti‐inflammatory drugs on the risk of infection is long known. , , What remains unknown in patients with COVID‐19 is as to whether this risk of infectious complications is balanced (or better, outweighed) by possible favourable effects of anti‐inflammatory drugs on relevant clinical outcomes. Indeed, the rational for administering anti‐inflammatory drugs in COVID‐19 patients is mostly based on the intention of attenuating the cytokine storm syndrome possibly prompted by SARS‐CoV‐2, but high‐level evidence supporting the efficacy of this practice is still unavailable, although randomized controlled trials are ongoing. Another different finding from previous reports is that we found a higher prevalence of Gram‐positive than Gram‐negative organisms as causative agents of ICU‐acquired BSI in COVID‐19 patients. Again, at least two different explanations may be considered. The first is that our sample of BSI events was larger than in previous reports, possibly depicting a more reliable estimate of the true distribution of the relative prevalence of the different causative agents. The second is that, borrowing from the observed microbiological epidemiology (higher prevalence of Gram‐positive organisms) in patients with severe influenza, and considering the frequent inability we had in rapidly differentiating between primary viral pneumonia and bacterial pulmonary superinfection in ICU‐admitted COVID‐19 patients, most COVID‐19 patients in our centre were treated with an anti‐methicillin‐resistant S aureus cephalosporin (most frequently ceftaroline, see Table 1) at ICU admission. However, while on the one hand this may be in line with the unusual high relative prevalence of enterococcal BSI (because of the impaired activity of ceftaroline against Enterococcus spp., although possible in vitro activity against E faecalis has been reported ), on the other hand, it is also true that coagulase‐negative staphylococci and S aureus were the other two most prevalent causative agents of BSI in our cohort. From this standpoint, conversely, the true relative prevalence of Gram‐positive organisms could be even higher than that registered in our cohort (because of the anti‐staphylococcal and anti‐pneumococcal activity of ceftaroline that could have reduced the prevalence, absolute and relative, of staphylococci and pneumococci as causative agents of BSI). Finally, although we apparently observed an improved survival of BSI in comparison with previous large studies conducted in non‐COVID‐19 ICU patients, it should be reminded that our sample size of BSI patients was limited (n = 31) and that follow‐up was very short. Consequently, any related conclusion should be drawn cautiously. Other important limitations of our study are its retrospective nature (mainly because of possible information and selection biases), its single‐centre nature that may impact generalization of results, and the lack of adequate power for exploring possible predictors of improved survival in COVID‐19 patients with ICU‐acquired BSI. In conclusion, in critically ill patients with COVID‐19, the incidence rate of ICU‐acquired BSI was high and the cumulative risk of developing BSI increased with ICU stay. Diagnosis of BSI in tocilizumab‐treated COVID‐19 patients may prove difficult because of the frequently absent fever and reduced serum concentrations of classical inflammatory markers. Further study will clarify if the increased risk of BSI we detected in COVID‐19 patients treated with anti‐inflammatory drugs is outweighed by the benefits of reducing any possible pro‐inflammatory dysregulation of the host response induced by SARS‐CoV‐2.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Outside the submitted work, DR Giacobbe reports honoraria from Stepstone Pharma GmbH and unconditional grants from MSD Italia and Correvio Italia. Outside the submitted work, M. Bassetti has received funding for scientific advisory boards, travel and speaker honoraria from Angelini, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BioMèrieux, Cidara, Correvio, Cubist, Menarini, Molteni, MSD, Nabriva, Paratek, Pfizer, Roche, Shionogi, Tetraphase, Thermo Fisher and The Medicine Company.

AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTION

DRG made substantial contributions to the study concept and design, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, first drafting of the manuscript and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. MB and PP made substantial contributions to the study concept and design and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. DB, LT, LM, AS and AV made substantial contributions to the study concept and design, and analysis and interpretation of data. LM, BB, FC, GC, CD, LM, CR, AV and LT made substantial contributions to the acquisition of data and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. LB, IB, GI, ADM, ADB, AM, MM, NP and AO made substantial contributions to the interpretation of data and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
  25 in total

1.  CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting.

Authors:  Teresa C Horan; Mary Andrus; Margaret A Dudeck
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.918

Review 2.  A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research.

Authors:  I Simera; D Moher; J Hoey; K F Schulz; D G Altman
Journal:  Eur J Clin Invest       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.686

3.  Risk of infections in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with tocilizumab.

Authors:  Veronika R Lang; Matthias Englbrecht; Jürgen Rech; Hubert Nüsslein; Karin Manger; Florian Schuch; Hans-Peter Tony; Martin Fleck; Bernhard Manger; Georg Schett; Jochen Zwerina
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 7.580

4.  Characteristics and determinants of outcome of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in intensive care units: the EUROBACT International Cohort Study.

Authors:  Alexis Tabah; Despoina Koulenti; Kevin Laupland; Benoit Misset; Jordi Valles; Frederico Bruzzi de Carvalho; José Artur Paiva; Nahit Cakar; Xiaochun Ma; Philippe Eggimann; Massimo Antonelli; Marc J M Bonten; Akos Csomos; Wolfgang A Krueger; Adam Mikstacki; Jeffrey Lipman; Pieter Depuydt; Aurélien Vesin; Maité Garrouste-Orgeas; Jean-Ralph Zahar; Stijn Blot; Jean Carlet; Christian Brun-Buisson; Claude Martin; Jordi Rello; Georges Dimopoulos; Jean-François Timsit
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  How to discriminate contamination from bloodstream infection due to coagulase-negative staphylococci: a prospective study with 654 patients.

Authors:  L Elzi; B Babouee; N Vögeli; R Laffer; M Dangel; R Frei; M Battegay; A F Widmer
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 8.067

6.  Population-based assessment of intensive care unit-acquired bloodstream infections in adults: Incidence, risk factors, and associated mortality rate.

Authors:  Kevin B Laupland; David A Zygun; H Dele Davies; Deirdre L Church; Thomas J Louie; Christopher J Doig
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  Nosocomial bloodstream infection and clinical sepsis.

Authors:  Stéphane Hugonnet; Hugo Sax; Philippe Eggimann; Jean-Claude Chevrolet; Didier Pittet
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.883

Review 8.  Diagnosis, evaluation, and management of acute kidney injury: a KDIGO summary (Part 1).

Authors:  John A Kellum; Norbert Lameire
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Bloodstream infections in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Daniele Roberto Giacobbe; Denise Battaglini; Lorenzo Ball; Iole Brunetti; Bianca Bruzzone; Giulia Codda; Francesca Crea; Andrea De Maria; Chiara Dentone; Antonio Di Biagio; Giancarlo Icardi; Laura Magnasco; Anna Marchese; Malgorzata Mikulska; Andrea Orsi; Nicolò Patroniti; Chiara Robba; Alessio Signori; Lucia Taramasso; Antonio Vena; Paolo Pelosi; Matteo Bassetti
Journal:  Eur J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 5.722

10.  Clinical Characteristics of Covid-19 in New York City.

Authors:  Parag Goyal; Justin J Choi; Laura C Pinheiro; Edward J Schenck; Ruijun Chen; Assem Jabri; Michael J Satlin; Thomas R Campion; Musarrat Nahid; Joanna B Ringel; Katherine L Hoffman; Mark N Alshak; Han A Li; Graham T Wehmeyer; Mangala Rajan; Evgeniya Reshetnyak; Nathaniel Hupert; Evelyn M Horn; Fernando J Martinez; Roy M Gulick; Monika M Safford
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 176.079

View more
  67 in total

1.  Corticosteroid treatment has no effect on hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Authors:  Filippo Albani; Federica Fusina; Enza Granato; Cristina Capotosto; Claudia Ceracchi; Riccardo Gargaruti; Giovanni Santangelo; Luca Schiavone; Maria Salvatrice Taranto; Cinzia Tosati; Elena Vavassori; Giuseppe Natalini
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-13       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Microbiological characteristics of bacteremias among COVID-19 hospitalized patients in a tertiary referral hospital in Northern Greece during the second epidemic wave.

Authors:  Efthymia Protonotariou; Paraskevi Mantzana; Georgios Meletis; Areti Tychala; Angeliki Kassomenaki; Olga Vasilaki; Georgia Kagkalou; Ioanna Gkeka; Maria Archonti; Styliani Kati; Simeon Metallidis; Lemonia Skoura
Journal:  FEMS Microbes       Date:  2021-12-02

3.  Healthcare-associated infections in COVID-19 ICU patients - two-centre study.

Authors:  Bartosz Kozłowski; Joanna Kubiak-Pulkowska; Julianna Pałka; Dominika Bożiłow; Magdalena Zając; Aleksander Deptuła
Journal:  Cent Eur J Public Health       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 1.154

4.  In-hospital mortality in SARS-CoV-2 stratified by the use of corticosteroid.

Authors:  Naser Alotaibi; Moudhi Alroomi; Wael Aboelhassan; Soumoud Hussein; Rajesh Rajan; Noor AlNasrallah; Mohammad Al Saleh; Maryam Ramadhan; Kobalava D Zhanna; Jiazhu Pan; Haya Malhas; Hassan Abdelnaby; Farah Almutairi; Bader Al-Bader; Ahmad Alsaber; Mohammed Abdullah
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2022-06-29

5.  Long-Term Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on In-Hospital Antibiotic Consumption and Antibiotic Resistance: A Time Series Analysis (2015-2021).

Authors:  Marianna Meschiari; Lorenzo Onorato; Erica Bacca; Gabriella Orlando; Marianna Menozzi; Erica Franceschini; Andrea Bedini; Adriana Cervo; Antonella Santoro; Mario Sarti; Claudia Venturelli; Emanuela Biagioni; Irene Coloretti; Stefano Busani; Massimo Girardis; José-María Lòpez-Lozano; Cristina Mussini
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-20

6.  [Rare superinfection in a COVID-19 patient-A chronology].

Authors:  E Gamon; D Tammena; M Wattenberg; T Augenstein
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2021-08-24       Impact factor: 1.041

7.  Immunomodulatory therapy, risk factors and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infection in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a Spanish case-control matched multicentre study (BACTCOVID).

Authors:  Gabriela Abelenda-Alonso; Alexander Rombauts; Carlota Gudiol; Isabel Oriol; Antonella Simonetti; Ana Coloma; Alejandro Rodríguez-Molinero; Elisenda Izquierdo; Vicens Díaz-Brito; Montserrat Sanmartí; Ariadna Padullés; Inmaculada Grau; Mar Ras; Alba Bergas; Lluïsa Guillem; Alejandro Blanco-Arévalo; Claudia Alvarez-Pouso; Natalia Pallarés; Sebastián Videla; Cristian Tebé; Jordi Carratalà
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 8.067

8.  Epidemiological and Clinical Characterization of Superinfections in Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

Authors:  Liana Signorini; Giovanni Moioli; Stefano Calza; Evelyn Van Hauwermeiren; Silvia Lorenzotti; Giovanni Del Fabro; Giulia Renisi; Paola Lanza; Barbara Saccani; Giulia Zambolin; Nicola Latronico; Francesco Castelli; Sergio Cattaneo; John C Marshall; Alberto Matteelli; Simone Piva
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2021-06-11

9.  Tocilizumab and Systemic Corticosteroids in the Management of COVID-19 Patients:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Hadeel Alkofide; Abdullah Almohaizeie; Sara Almuhaini; Bashayer Alotaibi; Khalid M Alkharfy
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 3.623

Review 10.  Pharmacotherapy in Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Risk of Secondary Infections: A Single-Center Case Series and Narrative Review.

Authors:  Michael Behal; Brooke Barlow; Breanne Mefford; Melissa L Thompson Bastin; J Chris Donaldson; Melanie Laine; Brittany D Bissell
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2021-07-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.