Citations

Abstract Objectives Carbapenem resistance is a growing public health crisis with regional variability in incidence. We characterized the susceptibility of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative rods (CR-GNRs) from the Pacific Northwest to five reserve beta-lactam agents including cefiderocol and aztreonam-avibactam. Methods A panel of 162 CR-GNRs from unique patients were tested against cefiderocol, aztreonam-avibactam, ceftazidime-avibactam, meropenem-vaborbactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam, with a subset of isolates derived from patients with bacteraemia (n = 55). Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was performed on representative Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates displaying a range of cefiderocol MICs (n = 9). Results Among all isolates, the MIC50 and MIC90 to cefiderocol was 0.25 and 4 mg/L, respectively, compared with 4 and >64 mg/L for aztreonam-avibactam. Overall, 98.3% of S. maltophilia (n = 60), 91.2% of Enterobacterales (n = 34) and 88.5% of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 26) isolates were susceptible to cefiderocol, while 78.6% of other non-fermenters had MICs ≤4 mg/L. Aztreonam-avibactam and cefiderocol exhibited similar activity against Enterobacterales and S. maltophilia, but aztreonam-avibactam was less active against other organisms. WGS of S. maltophilia isolates with elevated cefiderocol MICs identified disruptive mutations in PBP-encoding genes (mrcB/PBP1b and pbpC/PBP1c) that were not observed in highly susceptible isolates. The bacteraemia cohort had many comorbidities and a 29% 30 day all-cause mortality. In this cohort, cefiderocol demonstrated the highest in vitro activity as extrapolated from MICs, followed by ceftazidime-avibactam, aztreonam-avibactam, meropenem-vaborbactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam, respectively. Conclusions Cefiderocol exhibited the greatest in vitro activity against various CR-GNRs species in a Pacific Northwest population enriched for severely ill patients. Susceptibility to other agents was more variable among tested organisms.

Abstract Metagenomic sequencing of plasma has been advertised by Karius, Inc. as a way to diagnose a variety of infectious syndromes. Due to the lack of robust evidence of clinical utility, our laboratory began actively stewarding Karius testing. Microbiology Directors recommended cancelation of Karius orders when certain criteria were identified. We set out to review Karius test requests in a 52-month period of stewardship, during which we recommended cancellation on 21 of 57 orders (37%). Of Karius tests sent on samples with negative conventional testing, only 3 (7%) had positive results for Karius with plausible explanatory etiologies. Of these three cases, two were empirically covered for the positive finding without improvement and one case was never treated. Twelve (29%) had positive results that were noted by infectious diseases (ID) to reflect insignificant detections. Given the 4-fold higher detection of insignificant Karius results, we set out to systematically analyze the literature for the experience of insignificant detections at other centers. When we compared studies that included healthy controls or had clinical adjudication of positive Karius findings by ID physicians, we found a median of 17.5% of individual patients that had positive insignificant detections of potential pathogenic bacteria or fungi. The most frequently detected species were as likely to be clinically adjudicated to be insignificant as they were to be significant within the same studies. Overall, these findings highlight limited utility of Karius testing and a need for careful stewardship, not only to ensure it is sent on patients who may benefit, but also to ensure results of potential pathogens are interpreted cautiously.

Purpose In April 2017, the American Urological Association, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Urologic Oncology released a joint evidence-based practice guideline on clinically localized prostate cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. Methods The Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Expert Panel then reviewed the content and the recommendations. Results The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer guideline were clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer guideline except for two recommendations on cryosurgery. The two recommendations covering cryosurgery were not endorsed because the panel found that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of cryotherapy in this setting. Recommendations The ASCO Expert Panel endorsed all but two of the original guideline recommendations as written and offered a series of discussion points to guide practice.

Background: There are conflicting data on the results of irrigation and debridement with component retention in patients with acute periprosthetic hip infections. The goals of this study were to examine contemporary results of irrigation and debridement with component retention for acute infection after primary hip arthroplasty and to identify host, organism, antibiotic, or implant factors that predict success or failure. Methods: Ninety hips (57 total hip arthroplasties and 33 hemiarthroplasties) were diagnosed with acute periprosthetic hip infection (using strict criteria) and were treated with irrigation and debridement and component retention between 2000 and 2012. The mean follow-up was 6 years. Patients were stratified on the basis of McPherson criteria. Hips were managed with irrigation and debridement and retention of well-fixed implants with modular head and liner exchange (70%) or irrigation and debridement alone (30%). Seventy-seven percent of patients were treated with chronic antibiotic suppression. Failure was defined as failure to eradicate infection, characterized by a wound fistula, drainage, intolerable pain, or infection recurrence caused by the same organism strain; subsequent removal of any component for infection; unplanned second wound debridement for ongoing deep infection; and/or occurrence of periprosthetic joint infection-related mortality. Results: Treatment failure occurred in 17% (15 of 90 hips), with component removal secondary to recurrent infection in 10% (9 of 90 hips). Treatment failure occurred in 15% (10 of 66 hips) after early postoperative infection and 21% (5 of 24 hips) after acute hematogenous infection (p = 0.7). Patients with McPherson host grade A had a treatment failure rate of 8%, compared with 16% (p = 0.04) in host grade B and 44% in host grade C (p = 0.006). Most treatment failures (12 of 15 failures) occurred within the initial 6 weeks of treatment; failures subsequent to 6 weeks occurred in 3% of those treated with chronic antibiotic suppression compared with 11% of those who were not treated with suppression (hazard ratio, 4.0; p = 0.3). Conclusions: The success rate was higher in this contemporary series than in many previous series. Systemic host grade A was predictive of treatment success. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of ultrasound‐guided injections to blind injections in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in a large community‐based cohort.MethodsThis study evaluated residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, treated with a corticosteroid injection for CTS between 2001 and 2010. The proportion of patients receiving retreatment and the duration of retreatment‐free survival between blind and ultrasound‐guided injections were compared. Propensity score matching was used to control for confounding by indication.ResultsIn the matched data set consisting of 234 (of 600) hands treated with a blind injection and 87 (of 89) ultrasound‐guided injection cases, ultrasound guidance was associated with a reduced hazard of retreatment (hazard ratio 0.59 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.37–0.93]). In addition, ultrasound guidance was associated with 55% reduced odds of retreatment within 1 year compared to blind injections (adjusted odds ratio 0.45 [95% CI 0.24–0.83]).ConclusionThis study indicates that ultrasound‐guided injections are more effective in comparison to blind injections in the treatment of CTS.

Background: Hip arthroscopy for young patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has been successful, but the efficacy of hip arthroscopy in older patients is not clearly defined. Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients 55 years and older who are undergoing hip arthroscopy and to compare outcomes with those of patients younger than 55 years. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 201 (63 male, 138 female) patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAI without radiographic arthritis (Tönnis grade <3) were isolated from a prospective database and stratified by age to <55-year and ≥55-year groups. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS: functional scores, as well as Activities of Daily Living [ADL] and Sport subscales). A Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was used to evaluate the differences in outcome scores between the cohorts at each interval. Results: The <55-year group included 174 patients (mean age, 37 ± 12 years), and the ≥55-year group included 27 patients (mean age, 61 ± 5 years). The minimum follow-up time was 2 years in each group. Preoperative Tönnis grades and mHHS scores (59 vs 59; P = .75) were similar between groups. The ≥55-year cohort underwent labral debridement more frequently (78% vs 36%; P =.02) and were more likely to have full-thickness cartilage defects (22% vs 4%; P = .04). Despite this, the mHHS in both groups improved significantly from baseline, without significant differences at 1 year (86 [≥55 years] vs 81 [<55 years]; P = .53) or 2 years (73.88 [≥55 years] vs 79.54 [<55 years]; P = .06). However, at a minimum 2-year follow-up, patients <55 years had significant improvements over patients ≥55 years in the HOS subscales for ADL score (85.6 vs 75.2; P = .03), ADL rating (80.1 vs 70.0; P = .004), Sport score (70.2 vs 55.6; P = .04), and Sport rating (70.2 vs 58.0; P = .04). Conclusion: Although younger patients had superior HOS outcomes reported at 2 years compared with older patients after hip arthroscopy for FAI, both groups had significant improvement compared with their baseline. These data suggest that carefully selected patients 55 years and older without radiographic arthritis may benefit from hip arthroscopy.

Background: Tennis elbow is commonly encountered by physicians, yet little is known about the cost of treating this condition. Hypothesis: The largest cost associated with treating tennis elbow is procedural intervention. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Methods: This retrospective population-based study reviewed patients who were treated for new-onset tennis elbow between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2012. All patients were followed up through their medical and administrative records to identify health care encounters and interventions for tennis elbow. Unit costs for each health service/procedure were adjusted to nationally representative unit costs in 2013 inflation-adjusted dollars. Results: In a cohort of 931 patients who had 2 or more clinical encounters for new-onset lateral epicondylosis during a 12-month period after initial diagnosis, 62% received a median of 3 physical therapy sessions (cost, $100/session) and 40% received a median of 1 steroid injection (cost, $82/injection). Only 4% of patients received surgical intervention with mean costs of $4000. The mean (median) total direct medical cost of services related to lateral epicondylosis for the entire cohort was $660 ($402) per patient over the 1-year period after diagnosis. Patients who continued to be treated conservatively between 6 and 12 months after diagnosis incurred relatively low median costs of $168 per patient. Conclusion: In this cohort, a second encounter with a physician for tennis elbow was a strong predictor of increased treatment cost due to a higher likelihood of specialist referral, use of physical therapy, or treatment with steroid injection. Clinical Relevance: The majority of direct medical spending on tennis elbow occurs within the first 6 months of treatment, and relatively little expense occurs between 6 and 12 months after diagnosis unless a patient undergoes surgical intervention.