METHODOLOGY: One hundred and twenty clinical isolates of S. pneumoniae were obtained from patients of University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC). The strains were screened using a multiplex real-time PCR method for the presence of alterations in the genes encoding the penicillin binding proteins: pbp2b, macrolide resistance determinant ermB and the pneumolysin gene, ply. Dual-labelled Taqman probes were used in the real-time detection method comprising three different genes labeled with individual fluorophores at different wavelengths. One hundred and twenty isolates from bacterial cultures and isolates directly from blood cultures samples were analyzed using this assay.
RESULTS: A multiplex PCR comprising the antibiotic resistance genes, ermB and and pneumolysin gene (ply), a S. pneumoniae species specific gene, was developed to characterize strains of S. pneumoniae. Out of the 120 pneumococcal isolates, 58 strains were categorized as Penicillin Sensitive Streptococcus pneumoniae (PSSP), 36 as Penicillin Intermediate Streptococcus pneumoniae (PISP) and 26 as Penicillin Resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae (PRSP). All the 58 PSSP strains harboured the pbp2b gene while the 36 PISP and 26 PRSP strains did not harbour this gene, thus suggesting reduced susceptibility to penicillin. Resistance to erythromycin was observed in 47 of the pneumococcal strains while 15 and 58 were intermediate and sensitive to this drug respectively. Susceptibility testing to other beta-lactams (CTX and CRO) also showed reduced susceptibility among the strains within the PISP and PRSP groups but most PSSP strains were sensitive to other antibiotics.
CONCLUSION: The characterization of pneumococcal isolates for penicillin and erythromycin resistance genes could be useful to predict the susceptibility of these isolates to other antibiotics, especially beta-lactams drugs. We have developed an assay with a shorter turnaround time to determine the species and resistance profile of Streptococcus pneumoniae with respect to penicillin and macrolides using the Real Time PCR format with fluorescent labeled Taqman probes, hence facilitating earlier and more definitive antimicrobial therapy which may lead to better patient management.
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the effectiveness and safety of antimicrobial (antiseptic or antibiotic) dressings in reducing CVC-related infections in newborn infants. Had there been relevant data, we would have evaluated the effects of antimicrobial dressings in different subgroups, including infants who received different types of CVCs, infants who required CVC for different durations, infants with CVCs with and without other antimicrobial modifications, and infants who received an antimicrobial dressing with and without a clearly defined co-intervention.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG). We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (EBCHOST), CINAHL and references cited in our short-listed articles using keywords and MeSH headings, up to September 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared an antimicrobial CVC dressing against no dressing or another dressing in newborn infants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using the standard methods of the CNRG. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS: Out of 173 articles screened, three studies were included. There were two comparisons: chlorhexidine dressing following alcohol cleansing versus polyurethane dressing following povidone-iodine cleansing (one study); and silver-alginate patch versus control (two studies). A total of 855 infants from level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) were evaluated, 705 of whom were from a single study. All studies were at high risk of bias for blinding of care personnel or unclear risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessors. There was moderate-quality evidence for all major outcomes.The single study comparing chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing against polyurethane dressing/povidone-iodine cleansing showed no significant difference in the risk of CRBSI (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.65; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; 655 infants, moderate-quality evidence) and sepsis without a source (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.52; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.06; 705 infants, moderate-quality evidence). There was a significant reduction in the risk of catheter colonisation favouring chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing group (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86; RD -0.09, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.03; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 7 to 33; 655 infants, moderate-quality evidence). However, infants in the chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing group were significantly more likely to develop contact dermatitis, with 19 infants in the chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing group having developed contact dermatitis compared to none in the polyurethane dressing/povidone-iodine cleansing group (RR 43.06, 95% CI 2.61 to 710.44; RD 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.08; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 17, 95% CI 13 to 33; 705 infants, moderate-quality evidence). The roles of chlorhexidine dressing in the outcomes reported were unclear, as the two assigned groups received different co-interventions in the form of different skin cleansing agents prior to catheter insertion and during each dressing change.In the other comparison, silver-alginate patch versus control, the data for CRBSI were analysed separately in two subgroups as the two included studies reported the outcome using different denominators: one using infants and another using catheters. There were no significant differences between infants who received silver-alginate patch against infants who received standard line dressing in CRBSI, whether expressed as the number of infants (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.78; RD -0.12, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.09; 1 study, 50 participants, moderate-quality evidence) or as the number of catheters (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.89; RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.10; 1 study, 118 participants, moderate-quality evidence). There was also no significant difference between the two groups in mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.05; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.05; two studies, 150 infants, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). No adverse skin reaction was recorded in either group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate-quality evidence, chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol skin cleansing reduced catheter colonisation, but made no significant difference in major outcomes like sepsis and CRBSI compared to polyurethane dressing/povidone-iodine cleansing. Chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing posed a substantial risk of contact dermatitis in preterm infants, although it was unclear whether this was contributed mainly by the dressing material or the cleansing agent. While silver-alginate patch appeared safe, evidence is still insufficient for a recommendation in practice. Future research that evaluates antimicrobial dressing should ensure blinding of caregivers and outcome assessors and ensure that all participants receive the same co-interventions, such as the skin cleansing agent. Major outcomes like sepsis, CRBSI and mortality should be assessed in infants of different gestation and birth weight.
METHODS: Case report.
RESULTS: The patient presented with painless sudden visual loss and progressive shallowing of the anterior chamber caused by hemorrhagic Descemet membrane detachment. She had corneal neovascularization and a positive syphilis serology. Owing to the risk of pupil block glaucoma, the patient had surgical drainage of the blood via an ab externo approach.
CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates a previously unreported complication of syphilitic interstitial keratitis. The patient recovered good visual acuity and had residual pigment deposits in the pre-Descemet interface.
METHODS: Patients from TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database (September 2015 data transfer) aged 18 years and older with a CD4 count <50 cells/mm at ART initiation were included. The effect of macrolide prophylaxis on HIV-associated mortality or AIDS-defining conditions (as a combined outcome) and HIV-associated mortality alone were evaluated using competing risk regression. Sensitivity analysis was conducted in patients with a CD4 <100 cells/mm at ART initiation.
RESULTS: Of 1345 eligible patients, 10.6% received macrolide prophylaxis. The rate of the combined outcome was 7.35 [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.04 to 8.95] per 100 patient-years, whereas the rate of HIV-associated mortality was 3.14 (95% CI: 2.35 to 4.19) per 100 patient-years. Macrolide use was associated with a significantly decreased risk of HIV-associated mortality (hazard ratio 0.10, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.80, P = 0.031) but not with the combined outcome (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI: 0.32 to 2.229, P = 0.764). Sensitivity analyses showed consistent results among patients with a CD4 <100 cells/mm at ART initiation.
CONCLUSIONS: Macrolide prophylaxis is associated with improved survival among Asian HIV-infected patients with low CD4 cell counts and on ART. This study suggests the increased usage and coverage of macrolide prophylaxis among people living with HIV in Asia.