Yetmar, Zachary A.

Abstract Prototheca is a microalgae known to cause infections in humans, with protothecosis most commonly presenting as olecranon bursitis or localized soft tissue infection. Disseminated disease can be seen in immunocompromised patients. In this retrospective single-institution case series, we describe our experience with 7 patients with Prototheca infections.

Background. Surgical-site infection (SSI) is the most common early infectious complication after pancreas transplantation (PT). Although SSI has been shown to worsen outcomes, little data exist to guide optimal choices in perioperative prophylaxis. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort study of PT recipients from 2010–2020 to examine the effect of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis with Enterococcus coverage. Enterococcus coverage included antibiotics that would be active for penicillin-susceptible Enterococcus isolates. The primary outcome was SSI within 30 d of transplantation, and secondary outcomes were Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and a composite of pancreas allograft failure or death. Outcomes were analyzed by multivariable Cox regression. Results. Of 477 PT recipients, 217 (45.5%) received perioperative prophylaxis with Enterococcus coverage. Eighty-seven recipients (18.2%) developed an SSI after a median of 15 d from transplantation. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, perioperative Enterococcus prophylaxis was associated with reduced risk of SSI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.96; P = 0.034). Anastomotic leak was also significantly associated with elevated risk of SSI (HR 13.95; 95% CI, 8.72-22.32; P < 0.001). Overall, 90-d CDI was 7.4%, with no difference between prophylaxis groups (P = 0.680). SSI was associated with pancreas allograft failure or death, even after adjusting for clinical factors (HR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.16-3.23; P = 0.011). Conclusions. Perioperative prophylaxis with Enterococcus coverage was associated with reduced risk of 30-d SSI but did not seem to influence risk of 90-d CDI after PT. This difference may be because of the use of beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, which provide better activity against enteric organisms such as Enterococcus and anaerobes compared with cephalosporin. Risk of SSI was also related to anastomotic leak from surgery, and SSI itself was associated with subsequent risk of a poor outcome. Measures to mitigate or prevent early complications are warranted.

AbstractBackgroundIn the management of Gram‐negative bloodstream infection (GN‐BSI), short antimicrobial courses have been increasingly demonstrated to be non‐inferior to prolonged therapy, with lower risk of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and emergence of multi‐drug resistant (MDR) organisms. However, immunocompromised hosts were excluded from these studies. We investigated outcomes of short (≤10 days), intermediate (11–14 days), and prolonged (≥15 days) antimicrobial durations for GN‐BSI in neutropenic patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted on neutropenic patients with monomicrobial GN‐BSI between 2018 and 2022. The primary outcome was a composite of all‐cause mortality and microbiologic relapse within 90 days after therapy completion. The secondary outcome was a composite of 90‐day CDI and development of MDR‐GN bacteria. Cox regression analysis with propensity score (PS) adjustment was used to compare outcomes between the three groups.ResultsA total of 206 patients were classified into short (n = 67), intermediate (n = 81), or prolonged (n = 58) duration. Neutropenia was predominantly secondary to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (48%) or hematologic malignancy (35%). The primary sources of infection included intra‐abdominal (51%), vascular catheter (27%), and urinary (8%). Most patients received definitive therapy with cefepime or carbapenem. No significant difference in the primary composite endpoint was observed for intermediate versus short (PS‐adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.89; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.39–2.03) or prolonged versus short therapy (PS‐aHR 1.20; 95% CI 0.52–2.74). There was no significant difference in the secondary composite endpoint of CDI or MDR‐GN emergence.ConclusionOur data suggest that short antimicrobial courses had comparable 90‐day outcomes as intermediate and prolonged regimens for GN‐BSI among immunocompromised patients with neutropenia. image

1535 Background: Ambulatory management of select patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) may substantially decrease patients’ burden of illness and improve their quality of life, and is recommended by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines. However, in the United States, inpatient management remains the universal standard. We hereby report the health care utilization associated with the DEFeNDR remote patient monitoring (RPM) program, which leverages technology and virtual centralized nurse monitoring to facilitate ambulatory management of FN as an alternative to hospital-based care. Methods: Adult patients with cancer hospitalized with FN were assessed daily for eligibility to participate in the DEFeNDR program. Eligibility criteria included MASCC score >21 (per ASCO guidelines), and clinical judgment of the attending provider. Patients receiving cellular therapy (CAR-T, BMT) in the prior 100 days were excluded. Eligible patients agreeing to participate in the 30-day program were provided a kit containing cellular-enabled, pre-connected devices to facilitate monitoring, including twice-daily vital signs and electronic symptom questionnaires. Data were EHR-integrated in real-time and embedded decision trees facilitated alerts for adverse trends. RPM nurses responded to alerts and escalated care as indicated by pre-specified care pathways. Program assessment was performed at 20 weeks after full implementation. The primary outcome was the mean proportion of evaluable days spent inpatient (mPEDI) within 30 days of eligibility compared between those who participated in the program vs. those who declined. Results: 35 patients were offered participation in the DEFeNDR program. Of these, 17 participated and 18 declined. Baseline characteristics are provided. Participating patients experienced mPEDI of 6.9% (Standard Error [SE], 3.7%), compared with 17.7% (SE, 3.6%) for patients who declined participation. Due to small sample size, this difference (10.8%) did not reach statistical significance (Wilcoxon Rank Sums p-value, 0.15). 30-day mortality did not differ between groups. Mean inpatient days were also lower for patients participating in the program. Additionally, when readmitted, patients participating in RPM experienced a trend toward shorter length of stay and lower rates of intensive care unit utilization. Conclusions: A trend towards decreased burden of inpatient care is evident among patients participating in the DEFeNDR program. Further studies are warranted to assess comparative effectiveness of this model vs usual care.[Table: see text]

Beta-hemolytic streptococci are common causes of bloodstream infection (BSI). There is emerging data regarding oral antibiotics for BSI but limited for beta-hemolytic streptococcal BSI.

AbstractBackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend immunomodulators, tocilizumab or baricitinib, for the management of severe coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) in patients with increasing oxygen requirements. Given their immunosuppressive effects, there is a concern for higher rates of infection among transplant recipients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of transplant patients with severe COVID‐19 between April 2020 and January 2022 was performed at the Mayo Clinic. The primary outcome was incidence of secondary infections after COVID‐19 diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were 90‐day mortality, ventilatory days, and thromboembolic events.ResultsA total of 191 hospitalized transplant patients were studied, including 77 (40.3%) patients who received an immunomodulator. Overall, 89% were solid organ transplant recipients, with kidney as the most common transplanted organ (50.3%). The majority (89.0%) required oxygen supplementation on admission, and 39.8% of these patients required mechanical ventilation during the hospital course. There was no significant difference in the incidence of secondary infections between those who received or did not receive an immunomodulator (p = .984). Likewise, there was no difference in 90‐day mortality between patients who received or did not receive an immunomodulator (p = .134). However, higher mortality was observed among patients that developed a secondary infection (p < .001).ConclusionThe use of immunomodulators in transplant patients with severe COVID‐19 was not significantly associated with an increased risk of secondary infections. Secondary infections were associated with higher risk of all‐cause mortality. Future studies of larger cohorts are needed to explore the effect of immunomodulators on survival among transplant patients with COVID‐19. image