Browsing by Author "Nava, Stefano (7005445868)"

Background: Who should be tested for viruses in patients with community acquired pneumonia (CAP), prevalence and risk factors for viral CAP are still debated. We evaluated the frequency of viral testing, virus prevalence, risk factors and treatment coverage with oseltamivir in patients admitted for CAP. Methods: Secondary analysis of GLIMP, an international, multicenter, point-prevalence study of hospitalized adults with CAP. Testing frequency, prevalence of viral CAP and treatment with oseltamivir were assessed among patients who underwent a viral swab. Univariate and multivariate analysis was used to evaluate risk factors. Results: 553 (14.9%) patients with CAP underwent nasal swab. Viral CAP was diagnosed in 157 (28.4%) patients. Influenza virus was isolated in 80.9% of cases. Testing frequency and viral CAP prevalence were inhomogeneous across the participating centers. Obesity (OR 1.59, 95%CI: 1.01–2.48; p = 0.043) and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 1.62, 95%CI: 1.02–2.56; p = 0.040) were independently associated with viral CAP. Prevalence of empirical treatment with oseltamivir was 5.1%. Conclusion: In an international scenario, testing frequency for viruses in CAP is very low. The most common cause of viral CAP is Influenza virus. Obesity and need for invasive ventilation represent independent risk factors for viral CAP. Adherence to recommendations for treatment with oseltamivir is poor. © 2018 European Federation of Internal Medicine

Objective: Streptococcus pneumoniae is the most frequent bacterial pathogen isolated in subjects with Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) worldwide. Limited data are available regarding the current global burden and risk factors associated with drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae (DRSP) in CAP subjects. We assessed the multinational prevalence and risk factors for DRSP-CAP in a multinational point-prevalence study. Design: The prevalence of DRSP-CAP was assessed by identification of DRSP in blood or respiratory samples among adults hospitalized with CAP in 54 countries. Prevalence and risk factors were compared among subjects that had microbiological testing and antibiotic susceptibility data. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify risk factors independently associated with DRSP-CAP. Results: 3,193 subjects were included in the study. The global prevalence of DRSP-CAP was 1.3% and continental prevalence rates were 7.0% in Africa, 1.2% in Asia, and 1.0% in South America, Europe, and North America, respectively. Macrolide resistance was most frequently identified in subjects with DRSP-CAP (0.6%) followed by penicillin resistance (0.5%). Subjects in Africa were more likely to have DRSP-CAP (OR: 7.6; 95%CI: 3.34-15.35, p<0.001) when compared to centres representing other continents. Conclusions: This multinational point-prevalence study found a low global prevalence of DRSP-CAP that may impact guideline development and antimicrobial policies. © 2019

This study aimed to describe real-life microbiological testing of adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and to assess concordance with the 2007 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)/American Thoracic Society (ATS) and 2011 European Respiratory Society (ERS) CAP guidelines. This was a cohort study based on the Global Initiative for Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus Pneumonia (GLIMP) database, which contains point-prevalence data on adults hospitalised with CAP across 54 countries during 2015. In total, 3702 patients were included. Testing was performed in 3217 patients, and included blood culture (71.1%), sputum culture (61.8%), Legionella urinary antigen test (30.1%), pneumococcal urinary antigen test (30.0%), viral testing (14.9%), acute-phase serology (8.8%), bronchoalveolar lavage culture (8.4%) and pleural fluid culture (3.2%). A pathogen was detected in 1173 (36.5%) patients. Testing attitudes varied significantly according to geography and disease severity. Testing was concordant with IDSA/ATS and ERS guidelines in 16.7% and 23.9% of patients, respectively. IDSA/ATS concordance was higher in Europe than in North America (21.5% versus 9.8%; p<0.01), while ERS concordance was higher in North America than in Europe (33.5% versus 19.5%; p<0.01). Testing practices of adults hospitalised with CAP varied significantly by geography and disease severity. There was a wide discordance between real-life testing practices and IDSA/ATS/ERS guideline recommendations. © ERS 2018.

BACKGROUND: Empiric antimicrobial therapy with azithromycin is highly used in patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, despite prior research suggesting that azithromycin may be associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study was conducted using data from the ISACS-COVID- 19 (International Survey of Acute Coronavirus Syndromes-COVID- 19) registry. Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV- 2 infection were eligible for inclusion. The study included 793 patients exposed to azithromycin within 24 hours from hospital admission and 2141 patients who received only standard care. The primary exposure was cardiovascular disease (CVD). Main outcome measures were 30-day mortality and acute heart failure (AHF). Among 2934 patients, 1066 (36.4%) had preexisting CVD. A total of 617 (21.0%) died, and 253 (8.6%) had AHF. Azithromycin therapy was consistently associated with an increased risk of AHF in patients with preexisting CVD (risk ratio [RR], 1.48 [95% CI, 1.06–2.06]). Receiving azithromycin versus standard care was not significantly associated with death (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.69–1.28]). By contrast, we found significantly reduced odds of death (RR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.42–0.79]) and no significant increase in AHF (RR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.75–2.04]) in patients without prior CVD. The relative risks of death from the 2 subgroups were significantly different from each other (Pinteraction=0.01). Statistically significant association was observed between AHF and death (odds ratio, 2.28 [95% CI, 1.34–3.90]). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that azithromycin use in patients with COVID-19 and prior history of CVD is significantly associated with an increased risk of AHF and all-cause 30-day mortality. REGISTRATION: URL: Https://www.clini caltr ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05188612. © 2023 The Authors.

Aims Previous analyses on sex differences in case fatality rates at population-level data had limited adjustment for key patient clinical characteristics thought to be associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. We aimed to estimate the risk of specific organ dysfunctions and mortality in women and men. Methods This retrospective cross-sectional study included 17 hospitals within 5 European countries participating in the International Survey and results of Acute Coronavirus Syndromes COVID-19 (NCT05188612). Participants were individuals hospitalized with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from March 2020 to February 2022. Risk-adjusted ratios (RRs) of in-hospital mortality, acute respiratory failure (ARF), acute heart failure (AHF), and acute kidney injury (AKI) were calculated for women vs. men. Estimates were evaluated by inverse probability weighting and logistic regression models. The overall care cohort included 4499 patients with COVID-19-associated hospitalizations. Of these, 1524 (33.9%) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), and 1117 (24.8%) died during hospitalization. Compared with men, women were less likely to be admitted to ICU [RR: 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71–0.91]. In general wards (GWs) and ICU cohorts, the adjusted women-to-men RRs for in-hospital mortality were of 1.13 (95% CI: 0.90–1.42) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.70–1.05; pinteraction = 0.04). Development of AHF, AKI, and ARF was associated with increased mortality risk (odds ratios: 2.27, 95% CI: 1.73–2.98; 3.85, 95% CI: 3.21–4.63; and 3.95, 95% CI: 3.04–5.14, respectively). The adjusted RRs for AKI and ARF were comparable among women and men regardless of intensity of care. In contrast, female sex was associated with higher odds for AHF in GW, but not in ICU (RRs: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.94–1.67 vs. 0.83; 95% CI: 0.59–1.16, pinteraction = 0.04). Conclusions Women in GW were at increased risk of AHF and in-hospital mortality for COVID-19 compared with men. For patients receiving ICU care, fatal complications including AHF and mortality appeared to be independent of sex. Equitable access to COVID-19 ICU care is needed to minimize the unfavourable outcome of women presenting with COVID-19-related complications. © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.