AREAS COVERED: This review covers issues pertinent to infection in the HSCT patient, including bacterial and viral infection; strategies to reduce GVHD; infection patterns; resistance and treatment options; adverse drug reactions to antimicrobials, problems of antimicrobial resistance; perturbation of the microbiome; the role of prebiotics, probiotics, and antimicrobial peptides. We highlight potential strategies to minimize the use of antimicrobials.
EXPERT OPINION: Measures to control infection and its transmission remain significant HSCT management policy and planning issues. Transplant centers need to consider carefully prophylactic use of antimicrobials for neutropenic patients. The judicious use of appropriate antimicrobials remains a crucial part of the treatment protocol. However, antimicrobials' adverse effects cause microbiome diversity and dysbiosis and have been shown to increase morbidity and mortality.
AREAS COVERED: Antimicrobial stewardship programs improve rational antibiotic use, reduce antimicrobial resistance, decrease complications of antibiotic use, and improve patient outcomes. Though health professional students recognize the importance and impact of antibiotic prescribing knowledge, many studies have consistently demonstrated low levels of confidence and competencies amongst students, highlighting that health professional schools failed to prepare them to prescribe antibiotics accurately.
EXPERT OPINION: There is an urgent call for the integration of antimicrobial stewardship teaching at the undergraduate level of medical education to train future prescribers on this critical aspect of public health. Proper undergraduate education on rational antibiotics use would enable health professional graduates to enter clinical practice with adequate competencies to become rational prescribers.
METHODS: We conducted a study on 34 patients with HRP and randomly assigned the patients to two treatment arm groups (n=17). The formalin group underwent 4% formalin dab and another session 4 weeks later. The irrigation group self-administered daily rectal irrigation at home for 8 weeks and consumed oral metronidazole and ciprofloxacin during the first one week. We measured the patients' symptoms and endoscopic findings before and after total of 8 weeks of treatment in both groups.
RESULTS: Our study showed that HRP patients had reduced per rectal bleeding (p = 0.003) in formalin group, whereas irrigation group showed reduced diarrhoea (p=0.018) and tenesmus (p=0.024) symptoms. The comparison between the two treatment arms showed that irrigation technique was better than formalin technique for tenesmus (p=0.043) symptom only.
CONCLUSION: This novel treatment showed benefit in treating HRP. It could be a new treatment option which is safe and conveniently self-administered at home or used as a combination with other therapies to improve the treatment outcome for HRP.
.
Methods: A cross-sectional study, using a validated 23-item self-administered questionnaire, was conducted among pharmacists from 11 public hospitals in the State of Selangor, Malaysia, from December 2016 to January 2017. All public hospital pharmacists (n=432) were invited to participate in the survey. A 5-point Likert scale was employed in the questionnaire; the perception section was scored from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) while the practice section was scored from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were used to analyse data.
Results: Of the 432 pharmacists surveyed, 199 responded, giving a response rate of 46.0%. The majority of the respondents agreed (n=190, 95.5%) that the AMS programme improves patient care at their hospitals (median=5; IQR=1). Slightly less than half of the respondents indicated that a local antibiotic guideline was established in their hospitals (median=3, IQR=2.5), and had taken part in antimicrobial awareness campaigns to promote optimal use of antimicrobials in hospitals (median=3, IQR=1).
Conclusions: Overall, the perception and practices of the surveyed hospital pharmacists towards AMS programme were positive. National antibiotic guidelines, which take into consideration local antimicrobial resistance patterns, should be used fully to improve antimicrobial usage and to reduce practice variation. Collaboration among healthcare professionals should be strengthened to minimise the unfavourable consequences of unintended use of antimicrobial agents while optimising clinical outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: The mechanisms of bacterial resistance are described in this review and this is followed by an outline of the features and uses of metallic NPs as antibiotic agents to address bacteria that are antibiotic- sensitive and resistant. Additionally, a general impression of metallic NPs as antibiofilm bactericidal agents is presented.
CONCLUSION: Biofilms and bacterial strains that are resistant to antibiotics present a grave public health challenge and this has enhanced the need to develop new bactericidal agents. Therefore, nanomaterials are considered as a potential platform for managing bacterial infections.
METHODS: In this article, several studies on stingless bee honey that pointed out the numerous therapeutic profiles of this honey in terms of its antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, as well as moisturizing properties are reviewed. All of these therapeutic properties are related to wound healing properties.
RESULTS: Antioxidant in stingless bee honey could break the chain of free radicals that cause a detrimental effect to the wounded area. Furthermore, the antimicrobial properties of stingless bee honey could overcome the bacterial contamination and thus improve the healing rate. Moreover, the anti-inflammatory attribute in this honey could protect the tissue from highly toxic inflammatory mediators. The moisturizing properties of the honey could improve wound healing by promoting angiogenesis and oxygen circulation.
CONCLUSION: The application of honey to the wound has been widely used since ancient times. As a result, it is essential to understand the pharmacological mechanism of the honey towards the physiology of the wounded skin in order to optimize the healing rate in the future.
METHODS: 4T1 cancer cells were treated with kefir water in vitro to assess its antimigration and anti-invasion effects. BALB/c mice were injected with 4T1 cancer cells and treated orally with kefir water for 28 days.
RESULTS: Kefir water was cytotoxic toward 4T1 cells at IC50 (half-maximal inhibitory concentration) of 12.5 and 8.33 mg/mL for 48 and 72 hours, respectively. A significant reduction in tumor size and weight (0.9132 ± 0.219 g) and a substantial increase in helper T cells (5-fold) and cytotoxic T cells (7-fold) were observed in the kefir water-treated group. Proinflammatory and proangiogenic markers were significantly reduced in the kefir water-treated group.
CONCLUSIONS: Kefir water inhibited tumor proliferation in vitro and in vivo mainly through cancer cell apoptosis, immunomodulation by stimulating T helper cells and cytotoxic T cells, and anti-inflammatory, antimetastatic, and antiangiogenesis effects. This study brought out the potential of the probiotic beverage kefir water in cancer treatment.
OBJECTIVES: Our main objective was to assess the effectiveness of antimicrobial impregnation, coating or bonding on CVCs in reducing clinically-diagnosed sepsis, catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI), all-cause mortality, catheter colonization and other catheter-related infections in adult participants who required central venous catheterization, along with their safety and cost effectiveness where data were available. We undertook the following comparisons: 1) catheters with antimicrobial modifications in the form of antimicrobial impregnation, coating or bonding, against catheters without antimicrobial modifications and 2) catheters with one type of antimicrobial impregnation against catheters with another type of antimicrobial impregnation. We planned to analyse the comparison of catheters with any type of antimicrobial impregnation against catheters with other antimicrobial modifications, e.g. antiseptic dressings, hubs, tunnelling, needleless connectors or antiseptic lock solutions, but did not find any relevant studies. Additionally, we planned to conduct subgroup analyses based on the length of catheter use, settings or levels of care (e.g. intensive care unit, standard ward and oncology unit), baseline risks, definition of sepsis, presence or absence of co-interventions and cost-effectiveness in different currencies.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Anaesthesia, Critical and Emergency Care Review Group (ACE). In the updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE (OVID SP; 1950 to March 2015), EMBASE (1980 to March 2015), CINAHL (1982 to March 2015), and other Internet resources using a combination of keywords and MeSH headings. The original search was run in March 2012.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed any type of impregnated catheter against either non-impregnated catheters or catheters with another type of impregnation in adult patients cared for in the hospital setting who required CVCs. We planned to include quasi-RCT and cluster-RCTs, but we identified none. We excluded cross-over studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using risk ratio (RR), absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number need to treat to benefit (NNTB) for categorical data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, where appropriate, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS: We included one new study (338 participants/catheters) in this update, which brought the total included to 57 studies with 16,784 catheters and 11 types of impregnations. The total number of participants enrolled was unclear, as some studies did not provide this information. Most studies enrolled participants from the age of 18, including patients in intensive care units (ICU), oncology units and patients receiving long-term total parenteral nutrition. There were low or unclear risks of bias in the included studies, except for blinding, which was impossible in most studies due to the catheters that were being assessed having different appearances. Overall, catheter impregnation significantly reduced catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI), with an ARR of 2% (95% CI 3% to 1%), RR of 0.62 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.74) and NNTB of 50 (high-quality evidence). Catheter impregnation also reduced catheter colonization, with an ARR of 9% (95% CI 12% to 7%), RR of 0.67 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.76) and NNTB of 11 (moderate-quality evidence, downgraded due to substantial heterogeneity). However, catheter impregnation made no significant difference to the rates of clinically diagnosed sepsis (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; moderate-quality evidence, downgraded due to a suspicion of publication bias), all-cause mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07; high-quality evidence) and catheter-related local infections (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.07; 2688 catheters, moderate quality evidence, downgraded due to wide 95% CI).In our subgroup analyses, we found that the magnitudes of benefits for impregnated CVCs varied between studies that enrolled different types of participants. For the outcome of catheter colonization, catheter impregnation conferred significant benefit in studies conducted in ICUs (RR 0.70;95% CI 0.61 to 0.80) but not in studies conducted in haematological and oncological units (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.11) or studies that assessed predominantly patients who required CVCs for long-term total parenteral nutrition (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.34). However, there was no such variation for the outcome of CRBSI. The magnitude of the effects was also not affected by the participants' baseline risks.There were no significant differences between the impregnated and non-impregnated groups in the rates of adverse effects, including thrombosis/thrombophlebitis, bleeding, erythema and/or tenderness at the insertion site.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review confirms the effectiveness of antimicrobial CVCs in reducing rates of CRBSI and catheter colonization. However, the magnitude of benefits regarding catheter colonization varied according to setting, with significant benefits only in studies conducted in ICUs. A comparatively smaller body of evidence suggests that antimicrobial CVCs do not appear to reduce clinically diagnosed sepsis or mortality significantly. Our findings call for caution in routinely recommending the use of antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs across all settings. Further randomized controlled trials assessing antimicrobial CVCs should include important clinical outcomes like the overall rates of sepsis and mortality.