Low incidence of co-infection, but high incidence of ICU-acquired infections in critically ill patients with COVID-19

The impact of early rehabilitation in intensive care unit for COVID-19 patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of early rehabilitation in intensive care unit (ICU) on the survival and functional outcomes of COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU at acute phase.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective quasi-experimental study including 346 eligible COVID-19 patients from all admitted cases in an ICU in Vietnam, divided into three groups: no rehabilitation (n = 32), late rehabilitation (n = 109), and early rehabilitation (n = 205). Baseline characteristics and survival information of patient were collected with BORG-CR10 scale and PFIT; the data were collected at different time points: before intervention, when switching to oxygen-therapy, and at discharge.

RESULTS

The control group (patients not using rehabilitation therapy) has worse survival than both early rehabilitation group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.553; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.380-0.806; p value < 0.001) and late rehabilitation group (HR 0.374; CI 0.235-0.594; p value < 0.001). Regarding functional improvement, during the first five days, rehabilitation did not make a significant impact on the patients (p value > 0.05), however if continued from day 5 to day 20, the early-rehabilitation patients obtained a statistically significant improvement for BORG-CR10 (p value < 0.01). No clear association was found for PFIT (p value > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The research emphasises the benefits of the early rehabilitation in ICU for COVID-19 patients.

An analysis of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections in patients treated in a Swedish Covid-19 intensive care unit

Background

Catheter-related bloodstream infection is a well-known, severe complication of central venous catheter insertion. Studies that have evaluated the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic's influence on the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection in intensive care units are limited. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study on catheter-related bloodstream infection in coronavirus disease 2019 intensive care unit with previously documented low incidence rates to evaluate the pandemic's impact.

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on catheter-related bloodstream infection incidence in the intensive care unit.

Methods

All central venous catheter-inserted patients aged ⩾18 years admitted to the intensive care unit with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection, and the secondary outcome was the detection of catheter-related bloodstream infection-causative microorganisms.

Results

During the pandemic's first year, 124 patients were admitted, and 203 central venous catheters were inserted. Two patients developed catheter-related bloodstream infection. The incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection was 0.79/1000 catheter days. The microorganisms responsible for catheter-related bloodstream infection were Staphylococcus epidermidis and Escherichia coli.

Conclusion

This study revealed a low incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection in the coronavirus disease 2019-intensive care unit, thus suggesting that coronavirus disease 2019 is not a risk factor for catheter-related bloodstream infection and indicating the high resilience of well-established routines aimed at catheter-related bloodstream infection prevention.

Expanding Critical Care Delivery beyond the Intensive Care Unit: Determining the Design and Implementation Needs for a Tele-Critical Care Consultation Service

BACKGROUND

 Unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admissions from medical/surgical floors and increased boarding times of ICU patients in the emergency department (ED) are common; approximately half of these are associated with adverse events. We explore the potential role of a tele-critical care consult service (TC3) in managing critically ill patients outside of the ICU and potentially preventing low-acuity unplanned admissions and also investigate its design and implementation needs.

METHODS

 We conducted a qualitative study involving general observations of the units, shadowing of clinicians during patient transfers, and interviews with clinicians from the ED, medical/surgical floor units and their ICU counterparts, tele-ICU, and the rapid response team at a large academic medical center in St. Louis, Missouri, United States. We used a hybrid thematic analysis approach supported by open and structured coding using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

 Over 165 hours of observations/shadowing and 26 clinician interviews were conducted. Our findings suggest that a tele-critical care consult (TC3) service can prevent avoidable, lower acuity ICU admissions by offering a second set of eyes via remote monitoring and providing guidance to bedside and rapid response teams in the care delivery of these patients on the floor/ED. CFIR-informed enablers impacting the successful implementation of the TC3 service included the optional and on-demand features of the TC3 service, around-the-clock availability, and continuous access to trained critical care clinicians for avoidable lower acuity (ALA) patients outside of the ICU, familiarity with tele-ICU staff, and a willingness to try alternative patient risk mitigation strategies for ALA patients (suggested by TC3), before transferring all unplanned admissions to ICUs. Conversely, the CFIR-informed barriers to implementation included a desire to uphold physician autonomy by floor/ED clinicians, potential role conflicts with rapid response teams, additional workload for floor/ED nurses, concerns about obstructing unavoidable, higher acuity admissions, and discomfort with audio-visual tools. To amplify these potential enablers and mitigate potential barriers to TC3 implementation, informed by this study, we propose two key characteristics-essential for extending the delivery of critical care services beyond the ICU-underlying a telemedicine critical care consultation model including its virtual footprint and on-demand and optional service features.

CONCLUSION

 Tele-critical care represents an innovative strategy for delivering safe and high-quality critical care services to lower acuity borderline patients outside the ICU setting.

Healthcare-associated infections in critical COVID-19 patients in Tunis: epidemiology, risk factors, and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted adherences to healthcare-associated infection (HAI) prevention protocols. Herein, we studied the characteristics of all HAIs occurring in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A retrospective, single-center cohort of critical COVID-19 patients during 2021. Microbiological samples were collected if HAI was suspected. We analyzed all factors that could potentially induce HAI, using septic shock and mortality as endpoints.

RESULTS

Sixty-four among 161 included patients (39.7%) presented a total of 117 HAIs with an incidence density of 69.2 per 1,000 hospitalization days. Compared to the prior COVID-19 period (2013-2019), the identification of HAI increased in 2021. HAIs were classified into ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP; n=38), bloodstream infection (n=32), urinary tract infection (n=24), catheter-related infection (n=12), and fungal infection (n=11). All HAIs occurred significantly earlier in the post-COVID-19 period (VAP: 6 vs. 10 days, P=0.045, in 2017 and 2021). Acinetobacter baumannii (39.5%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (27%) were the most commonly isolated pathogens that exhibited a multidrug-resistant (MDR) profile, observed in 89% and 64.5%, respectively. The HAI factors were laboratory abnormalities (odds ratio [OR], 6.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-26.0), cumulative steroid dose (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3-4.0), and invasive procedures (OR, 20.7; 95% CI, 5.3-64.0). HAI was an independent factor of mortality (OR, 8.5; P=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 era, the incidence of HAIs increased and MDR isolates remained frequent. A severe biological inflammatory syndrome, invasive devices, and elevated cumulative steroid dosages were related to HAIs. HAI was a significant death factor.

Using risk factors and markers to predict bacterial respiratory co-/superinfections in COVID-19 patients: is the antibiotic steward's toolbox full or empty?

BACKGROUND

Adequate diagnosis of bacterial respiratory tract co-/superinfection (bRTI) in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients is challenging, as there is insufficient knowledge about the role of risk factors and (para)clinical parameters in the identification of bacterial co-/superinfection in the COVID-19 setting. Empirical antibiotic therapy is mainly based on COVID-19 severity and expert opinion, rather than on scientific evidence generated since the start of the pandemic.

PURPOSE

We report the best available evidence regarding the predictive value of risk factors and (para)clinical markers in the diagnosis of bRTI in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team identified different potential risk factors and (para)clinical predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 and formulated one or two research questions per topic. After a thorough literature search, research gaps were identified, and suggestions concerning further research were formulated. The quality of this narrative review was ensured by following the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles.

RESULTS

Taking into account the scarcity of scientific evidence for markers and risk factors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients, to date, COVID-19 severity is the only parameter which can be associated with higher risk of developing bRTI.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the usefulness of risk factors and (para)clinical factors as predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients is scarce. Robust studies are needed to optimise antibiotic prescribing and stewardship activities in the context of COVID-19.

Temporal evolution of laboratory characteristics in patients critically ill with COVID‑19 admitted to the intensive care unit (Review)

In the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), laboratory medicine has played a crucial role in both diagnosis and severity assessment. Although the importance of baseline laboratory findings has been extensively reported, data regarding their evolution over the clinical course are limited. The aim of the present narrative review was to provide the dynamic changes of the routine laboratory variables reported in patients with severe COVID-19 over the course of their critical illness. A search was made of the literature for articles providing data on the time-course of routine laboratory tests in patients with severe COVID-19 during their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). White blood cell, neutrophil and lymphocyte counts, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, platelet counts, as well as D-dimer, fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase and serum albumin levels were selected as disease characteristics and routine laboratory parameters. A total of 25 research articles reporting dynamic trends in the aforementioned laboratory parameters over the clinical course of severe COVID-19 were identified. During the follow-up period provided by each study, the majority of the laboratory values remained persistently abnormal in both survivors and non-survivors. Furthermore, in the majority of studies, the temporal trends of laboratory values distinctly differentiated patients between survivors and non-survivors. In conclusion, there are distinct temporal trends in selected routine laboratory parameters between survivors and non-survivors with severe COVID-19 admitted to the ICU, indicating their importance in the prognosis of clinical outcome.

Epidemiological Characteristics and Outcomes Predictors for Intensive Care Unit COVID-19 Patients in Al-Madinah, Saudi Arabia. Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

The global pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19) increased the demand for intensive care unit (ICU) services. Mortality and morbidity rates among ICU COVID-19 patients are affected by several factors, such as severity, comorbidities, and coinfections. In this study, we describe the demographic characteristics of COVID-19 patients admitted to an ICU in Saudi Arabia, and we determined the predictors for mortality and prolonged ICU length of stay. Additionally, we determined the prevalence of bacterial coinfection and its effect on the outcomes for ICU COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the medical records of 142 COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU at a tertiary hospital in Madinah, Saudi Arabia. Data on demographics, medical history, mortality, length of stay, and presence of coinfection were collected for each patient.

Results

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and intubation were reliable predictors of mortality and ICU length of stay among these ICU COVID-19 patients. Moreover, bacterial coinfections were detected in 23.2% of the patients and significantly (p < 0.001) prolonged their ICU length of stay, explaining the 10% increase in the length of stay for these patients. Furthermore, mortality reached 70% among the coinfected patients, and 60.8% of the isolated coinfecting pathogens were multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains of Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Staphylococcus aureus.

Conclusion

Increased NLR and intubation are predictors of mortality and prolonged length of stay in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Coinfection with MDR bacterial strains potentially results in complications and is a high-risk factor for prolonged ICU length of stay.

Single-Center Experience With the Seraph-100® Microbind® Affinity Blood Filter in Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Septic Shock at a Military Treatment Facility

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is characterized by a dysregulated inflammatory response, which may result in severe hemodynamic instability and septic shock. The Seraph-100® Microbind® Affinity Blood Filter is a commercially available extracorporeal pathogen absorbent device with the ability to bind pathogens and cytokines present within the blood. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the Seraph-100® for patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and septic shock.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed to evaluate the use of the Seraph-100® blood filter at a Single Center tertiary-care facility at Brooke Army Medical Center from 2020 to 2021. Nine patients (11 treatments) were completed with the Seraph-100® blood filter in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and septic shock. The Seraph-100® blood filter was used in combination with continuous renal replacement therapy and slow low-efficiency dialysis or directly in parallel with the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit.

RESULTS

Within this cohort, there was a statistically significant improvement in the following clinical parameters comparing values to before and after treatment with the Seraph-100® blood filter: Mean arterial pressure (mmHg) (64.2 ± 2.36 vs. 76.2 ± 2.68; P < .001), heart rate (beats per minute) (128 ± 6.6 vs. 100.3 ± 6.07; P < .001), administered fraction of oxygen (%) (74.4 ± 10.58 vs. 60.3 ± 10.35; P < .001), serum lactate (mmol/L) (6.14 ± 1.25 vs. 2.8 ± 1.14; P = .0095), and pH (7.29 ± 0.03 vs. 7.39 ± 0.04; P = .0203). There were statistically significant improvements in vasopressor requirements: norepinephrine (mcg/min) (36.3 ± 4.74 vs. 8.3 ± 3.92; P < .001), vasopressin (units/min) (0.04 ± 0.004 vs. 0.02 ± 0.003; P < .001), dobutamine (mcg/kg/min) (2.3 ± 1.00 vs. 0.2 ± 0.75; P = .006) and angiotensin II (ng/kg/min) (34.5 ± 6.4 vs. 3.3 ± 5.26; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the Seraph-100® blood filter was associated with statistically and clinically significant improvements in hemodynamic parameters and decreased vasopressor requirements in patients with septic shock and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Prevalence of secondary infections and association with mortality rates of hospitalized COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

ICU and other patients hospitalized with corona-virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are more susceptible to secondary infections. Undetected secondary infections tend to have a severe clinical impact, associated with prolonged hospitalization and higher rates of inpatient mortality.

OBJECTIVES

Estimate the prevalence of secondary infections, determine the frequency of microbial species detected at different body sites, and measure the association between secondary infections and outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analytical study.

SETTING

Tertiary care center in Riyadh PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected through retrospective chart review of hospitalized COVID-19 patients >18 years old from March 2020 until May 2022 at King Saud University Medical City (27 months). Rates of secondary infections among hospitalized COVID-19 patients were described and data on clinical outcomes (intensive care admission, invasive management procedures and mortality) was collected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Features and rates of infection and mortality.

SAMPLE SIZE

260 RESULTS: In total, 24.2% of the study population had secondary infections. However, only 68.8% of patients had secondary infection testing, from which 35.2% had a confirmed secondary infection. These patients had a significantly higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus (P<.0001) and cardiovascular diseases (P=.001). The odds of ICU admissions (63.3%) among secondarily infected patients was 8.4 times higher compared to patients with only COVID-19 infection (17.3%). Secondarily infected patients were more likely to receive invasive procedures (OR=5.068) and had a longer duration of hospital stay compared to COVID-19 only patients. Overall mortality was 16.2%, with a predominantly higher proportion among those secondarily infected (47.6% vs 6.1%) (OR=14.015). Bacteria were the most commonly isolated organisms, primarily from blood (23.3%), followed by fungal isolates, which were mostly detected in urine (17.2%). The most detected organism was Candida albicans (17.2%), followed by Escherichia coli (9.2%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (9.2%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9.2%).

CONCLUSION

Secondary infections were prevalent among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Secondarily infected patients had longer hospital stay, higher odds of ICU admission, mortality, and invasive procedures.

LIMITATION

Single-center study, retrospective design and small sample size.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Unpacking the Complexity of COVID-19 Fatalities: Adverse Events as Contributing Factors-A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis of the First Two Years of the Pandemic

In a retrospective analysis of 477 fatal COVID-19 cases hospitalised at a single medical centre during the period from 6 March 2020 to 30 June 2022, several factors defining those patients at admission were assessed, as well as the course of the hospitalisation and factors contributing to death. There was a predominance of men (59.3% (283)) burdened by comorbidities, with increased inflammation at admission. Patients aged ≥ 81 years were significantly more likely to be admitted to and die in infectious diseases units (IDU) due to respiratory failure, their hospital stays were shorter, and they were most likely not to receive specialist treatment. The most common COVID-19 complications included acute kidney injury in 31.2% (149) patients and thromboembolic complications in 23.5% (112). The course of hospitalisation was complicated by healthcare-associated infections (HAI) in 33.3% (159) of cases, more often in those treated with baricitinib (p < 0.001). The initial use of an antibiotic, although common (94.8% (452)), was unwarranted in almost half of the cases (47.6% (215)). Complications of hospitalisation (46.1% (220)) and adverse events involving staff (49.7% (237)) were found in almost half of the patients. In 88.7% (423) of the cases, death was due to respiratory failure in the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Adverse events during hospitalisation should be considered as an additional factor that, in addition to the infection itself, may have influenced the death of patients.

Secondary infections in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A retrospective single-center study

Background

Patients infected with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) may have a higher incidence of developing secondary infections. These infections can further deteriorate the hospital course and increase mortality. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to investigate the incidence, associated risk factors, outcomes, and pathogens associated with secondary bacterial infections in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Methods

All adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit requiring mechanical ventilation from October 1, 2020 until December 31, 2021 were screened for inclusion in the study. A total of 86 patients were screened and 65 who met the inclusion criteria were prospectively entered into a customized electronic database. The database was then retrospectively analyzed to investigate secondary bacterial infections.

Results

Of the 65 patients included, 41.54% acquired at least one of the studied secondary bacterial infections during the course of their ICU stay. The most common secondary infection (59.26%) seen was hospital-acquired pneumonia followed by acquired bacteremia of unknown origin (25.92%) and catheter-related sepsis (14.81%). Diabetes mellitus (P = <.001), cumulative dose of corticosteroids (P = 0.001), were associated with an increased risk of secondary bacterial infection. The most commonly isolated pathogen in patients with secondary pneumonia was Acinetobacter baumannii. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common organism associated with a bloodstream infection and catheter-related sepsis.

Conclusion

The incidence of secondary bacterial infections was high in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and was associated with a longer duration of admission to the hospital and ICU and a higher mortality. Diabetes mellitus and cumulative dose of corticosteroids were associated with significantly increased risk of secondary bacterial infection.

Comparison of circulating bacterial profiles between mild and severe COVID-19 patients

Recent reports revealed that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected patients can develop bacteremia; however, the circulating bacterial profile is not well studied. Therefore, this study has aimed to investigate circulating bacterial profile in mild (n = 15) and severe (n = 13) SARS-CoV-2-infected patients as well as healthy controls (n = 10), using 16S rDNA (V4) sequencing approach. The alpha diversity indexes and Bray-Curtis dissimilarity matrix revealed that the bacterial profiles between the two conditions are significantly different. Correspondingly, the relative abundance indicates that the predominant bacterial phylum in both conditions was Proteobacteria. At genus level, the dominant bacterial genera in the mild patients belonged to Sphingomonas, Stenotrophomonas, and Achromobacter, while bacterial genera belonging to Enhydrobacter, Comamonas, and Acinetobacter were dominant in the severe patients. Furthermore, Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) Effect Size (LEfSe). revealed that Stenotrophomonas, Delftia, Achromobacter, and Neisseria were enriched in the mild condition, while Agrobacterium, Comamonas, Pseudomonas, Corynebacterium, Alkaliphilus, and Kocuria were enriched in the severe patients. These results revealed a distinct circulating bacterial profile in the mild and severe SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, which may provide an insight for further therapeutic strategy.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare associated infections: A teaching hospital experience

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic, with a high capability of contagious distribution, where national secondary and co-infections characterization are lacking. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infection rates among patients admitted to the intensive care units at King Abdullah University Hospital, profiling the drug resistance rates nationally. This is a cross-sectional study of COVID-19 associated infections that was conducted at a teaching hospital, in the north of Jordan. It included all COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units during the first and second pandemic waves. Data on age, gender, length of stay, co-morbidities, co-infections and sensitivity to antibiotics were retrospectively collected from the hospital information database. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software. A total of 589 COVID-19 patients were included, of whom 20% developed bacterial associated infections. The ratio of bacterial co-infection to secondary infections was 1:8. Gram-negative bacteria, Acinetobacter baumannii (40.1%), Eschericia coli (17.5%), Klebsiella pneumonia (6.8%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5.1%) were the most abundant isolated species. The detection rates of E coli (ESBL), K pneumonia (ESBL), A baumannii (CRO), P aeruginosa (CRO), S aureus (MRSA) were 52%, 67%, 97%, 44%, and 67%, respectively.

Infections and antimicrobial prescribing in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the first pandemic wave

Objective

To evaluate the rate of coinfections and secondary infections seen in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and antimicrobial prescribing patterns.

Methods

This single-center, retrospective study included all patients aged ≥18 years admitted with COVID-19 for at least 24 hours to a 280-bed, academic, tertiary-care hospital between March 1, 2020, and August 31, 2020. Coinfections, secondary infections, and antimicrobials prescribed for these patients were collected.

Results

In total, 331 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were evaluated. No additional cases were identified in 281 (84.9%) patients, whereas 50 (15.1%) had at least 1 infection. In total, of 50 patients (15.1%) who were diagnosed with coinfection or secondary infection had bacteremia, pneumonia, and/or urinary tract infections. Patients who had positive cultures, who were admitted to the ICU, who required supplemental oxygen, or who were transferred from another hospital for higher level of care were more likely to have infections. The most commonly used antimicrobials were azithromycin (75.2%) and ceftriaxone (64.9%). Antimicrobials were prescribed appropriately for 55% of patients.

Conclusions

Coinfection and secondary infections are common in patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 at hospital admission. Clinicians should consider starting antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients while limiting antimicrobial use in patients who are not critically ill.

Bacterial coinfection and antibiotic resistance in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There were a few studies on bacterial coinfection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients worldwide. This systematic review aimed to provide the pooled prevalence of bacterial coinfection from published studies from 2020 to 2022.

Methods

Three databases were used to search the studies, and 49 studies from 2,451 identified studies involving 212,605 COVID-19 patients were included in this review.

Results

The random-effects inverse-variance model determined that the pooled prevalence of bacterial coinfection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients was 26.84% (95% CI [23.85-29.83]). The pooled prevalence of isolated bacteria for Acinetobacter baumannii was 23.25% (95% CI [19.27-27.24]), Escherichia coli was 10.51% (95% CI [8.90-12.12]), Klebsiella pneumoniae was 15.24% (95% CI [7.84-22.64]), Pseudomonas aeruginosa was 11.09% (95% CI [8.92-13.27]) and Staphylococcus aureus (11.59% (95% CI [9.71-13.46])). Meanwhile, the pooled prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria for extended-spectrum beta-lactamases producing Enterobacteriaceae was 15.24% (95% CI [7.84-22.64]) followed by carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (14.55% (95% CI [9.59-19.52%])), carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6.95% (95% CI [2.61-11.29])), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (5.05% (95% CI [3.49-6.60])), carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (4.95% (95% CI [3.10-6.79])), and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (1.26% (95% CI [0.46-2.05])).

Conclusion

All the prevalences were considered as low. However, effective management and prevention of the infection should be considered since these coinfections have a bad impact on the morbidity and mortality of patients.

Baricitinib vs tocilizumab treatment for hospitalized adult patients with severe COVID-19 and associated cytokine storm: a prospective, investigational, real-world study

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to compare outcomes of hospitalized adults with severe COVID-19 and cytokine storm treated with tocilizumab or baricitinib.

METHODS

A prospective, investigational, real-world study was performed from April 2020 to April 2021 at our center. COVID-19 severity was classified by World Health Organization criteria, and cytokine storm was documented along predefined criteria. Eligible patients were enrolled at diagnosis if they fulfilled a priori inclusion criteria and received standard-of-care plus tocilizumab or baricitinib for >48 hours. Patients were followed per protocol for 28 days post-diagnosis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were invasive mechanical ventilation and major infectious complications.

RESULTS

Of 463 patients, 102/463 (22.1%) received tocilizumab, and 361/463 (77.9%) baricitinib. Baseline characteristics were balanced. At 28 days, there was no difference in all-cause mortality (22/102, 21.6% vs 64/361, 17.7%; P-value = 0.38). Requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation was more frequent after tocilizumab (52/102, 50.9% vs 96/361, 26.6%; P <0.01), rate of major infectious complications was similar (32/102, 31.4% vs 96/361, 26.6%; P-value = 0.34). In logistic regression, the immunomodulatory drug was not retained as a predictor of all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed statistically similar survival distributions.

CONCLUSION

All-cause mortality was similar between adults treated with baricitinib or tocilizumab for severe COVID-19 with cytokine storm.

Increased rates of secondary bacterial infections, including Enterococcus bacteremia, in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

OBJECTIVE

We compared the rates of hospital-onset secondary bacterial infections in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with rates in patients with influenza and controls, and we investigated reports of increased incidence of Enterococcus infections in patients with COVID-19.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

An academic quaternary-care hospital in San Francisco, California.

PATIENTS

Patients admitted between October 1, 2019, and October 1, 2020, with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (N = 314) or influenza PCR (N = 82) within 2 weeks of admission were compared with inpatients without positive SARS-CoV-2 or influenza tests during the study period (N = 14,332).

METHODS

National Healthcare Safety Network definitions were used to identify infection-related ventilator-associated complications (IVACs), probable ventilator-associated pneumonia (PVAP), bloodstream infections (BSIs), and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs). A multiple logistic regression model was used to control for likely confounders.

RESULTS

COVID-19 patients had significantly higher rates of IVAC and PVAP compared to controls, with adjusted odds ratios of 4.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-13.9) and 10.4 (95 % CI, 2.1-52.1), respectively. COVID-19 patients had higher incidence of BSI due to Enterococcus but not BSI generally, and whole-genome sequencing of Enterococcus isolates demonstrated that nosocomial transmission did not explain the increased rate. Subanalyses of patients admitted to the intensive care unit and patients who required mechanical ventilation revealed similar findings.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of IVAC, PVAP, and Enterococcus BSI compared with hospitalized controls, which is not fully explained by factors such as immunosuppressive treatments and duration of mechanical ventilation. The mechanism underlying increased rates of Enterococcus BSI in COVID-19 patients requires further investigation.

Secondary respiratory early and late infections in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19

Background

Patients with COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation may become aggravated with a secondary respiratory infection. The aim of this study was to describe secondary respiratory infections, their predictive factors, and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation.

Methods

A cohort study was carried out in a single tertiary hospital in Santiago, Chile, from 1st June to 31st July 2020. All patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit that required mechanical ventilation were included.

Results

A total of 175 patients were enrolled, of which 71 (40.6%) developed at least one secondary respiratory infection during follow-up. Early and late secondary infections were diagnosed in 1.7% and 31.4% respectively. Within late secondary infections, 88% were bacterial, 10% were fungal, and 2% were of viral origin. One-third of isolated bacteria were multidrug-resistant. Bivariate analysis showed that the history of corticosteroids used before admission and the use of dexamethasone during hospitalization were associated with a higher risk of secondary infections (p = 0.041 and p = 0.019 respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that for each additional day of mechanical ventilation, the risk of secondary infection increases 1.1 times (_adOR = 1.07; 95% CI 1.02–1.13, p = 0.008)

Conclusions

Patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit and requiring mechanical ventilation had a high rate of secondary infections during their hospital stay. The number of days on MV was a risk factor for acquiring secondary respiratory infections.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07743-2.

["Infections related to invasive devices in COVID-19 patients admitted to critical care units"]

Introducción

Los pacientes COVID-19 ingresados en unidades de críticos presentan una intensa respuesta inflamatoria y la necesidad de sustitución de órganos o sistemas durante largos periodos de tiempo lo que facilita la presencia de complicaciones infecciosas.

Objetivos

Presentar las tasas nacionales de infecciones relacionadas con dispositivos invasivos (IRDI) en los pacientes COVID-19, así como las tasas de bacterias multirresistentes (BMR) adquiridas durante su estancia en las unidades de críticos.

Método

Análisis retrospectivo de los pacientes COVID-19 incluidos durante la primera, segunda y cuarta ola de pandemia en una base de datos (ENVIN-HELICS), observacional y multicéntrica, de ámbito nacional. Se registraron las neumonías relacionadas con ventilación mecánica (N-VM), infecciones del tracto urinario relacionadas con sonda uretral (ITU-SU) y bacteriemias primarias relacionas con catéteres venoso central (BP-CVC) cuyas tasas se presentan como densidad de incidencia (DI). Se registraron las BMR adquiridas durante la estancia en las unidades de críticos que se presentan como incidencia acumulada (IA).

Resultados

Se incluyeron 7.778 pacientes, 1.525 (19,6%) en la primera ola de la pandemia, 3.484 (44,8%) en la segunda y 2.769 (35,6%) en la cuarta. Estancia en la UCI de 21 días en la primera y segunda ola y de 19,7 días en la cuarta. Mortalidad intra-UCI en la primera ola, del 31% disminuyendo al 26,3% en la segunda y del 18,9% en la cuarta. Tasas de N-VM de 14,31, 13,56 y 19,99 episodios por 1.000 días de VM en cada ola. Tasas de ITU-SU de 6,54, 5,63 y 7,97 episodios por 1.000 días de SU. Tasas de BP-CVC de 12,42, 7,95 y 8,13 por 1.000 días de CVC. La tasa de BMR fue de 22,9, 15,3 y 15,3 BMR por 100 pacientes ingresados.

Conclusiones

Elevadas tasas de las diferentes IRDI en los pacientes COVID que se mantienen en las 3 olas analizadas. Elevadas tasas de BMR adquiridas durante la estancia en las unidades de críticos con tendencia a disminuir en la cuarta ola.

A Retrospective, Monocentric Study Comparing Co and Secondary Infections in Critically Ill COVID-19 and Influenza Patients

Few data are available on infectious complications in critically ill patients with different viral infections. We performed a retrospective monocentric study including all of the patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with confirmed COVID-19 (as of 13 March 2020) or Influenza A and/or B infections (as of 1 January 2015) until 20 April 2020. Coinfection and secondary infections (occurring within and after 48 h from admission, respectively) were recorded. Fifty-seven COVID-19 and 55 Influenza patients were included. Co-infections were documented in 13/57 (23%) COVID-19 patients vs. 40/55 (73%) Influenza patients (p < 0.001), most of them being respiratory (9/13, 69% vs. 35/40, 88%; p = 0.13) and of bacterial origin (12/13, 92% vs. 29/40, 73%; p = 0.25). Invasive aspergillosis infections were observed only in Influenza patients (8/55, 15%). The COVID-19 and Influenza patients presented 1 (0−4) vs. 0 (0−4) secondary infections (p = 0.022), with comparable sites being affected (lungs: 35/61, 57% vs. 13/31, 42%; p = 0.16) and causative pathogens occurring (Gram-negative bacteria: 51/61, 84% vs. 23/31, 74%; p > 0.99). The COVID-19 patients had longer ICU lengths of stay (15 (−65) vs. 5 (1−89) days; p = 0.001), yet the two groups had comparable mortality rates (20/57, 35% vs. 23/55, 41%; p = 0.46). We report fewer co-infections but more secondary infections in the ICU COVID-19 patients compared to the Influenza patients. Most of the infectious complications were respiratory and of bacterial origin.

Correlation between Multidrug Resistance Infection with Clinical Outcomes of Critically ill Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to an Intensive Care at RSUP Dr. M. Djamil in Indonesia

BACKGROUND: Approximately 14–50% of severe COVID-19 patients are admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) that acquires a multidrug-resistant bacterial infection (MDR) and worsens clinical outcomes of patients. AIM: We aim to determine the increased risk of MDR infection in the ICU including large-spectrum antibiotic administration, invasive procedure performance (mechanical ventilation), and clinical outcomes of patient. METHODS: We analyzed 227 patients with a primary diagnosis of COVID-19 on mechanical ventilation who were admitted to ICU COVID-19 RSUP Dr. M. Djamil from 2020 to 2021. Demographic information, sputum culture results, intubation, and clinical outcomes were all collected in the medical records for this retrospective cohort study. Patients who were hospitalized for <48 h in the ICU were excluded from the study. An independent t-test and a Chi-square test were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: In sixty patients (26.4%), bacteria were found in the sputum culture, 40 patients (66.7%) of them were MDR. The most common bacteria found was Acinetobacter baumanii (35%) followed by Klebsiella pneumonia (21.7%). There is a significant relationship between MDR (p-value 0.000) and intubation (p-value, 000) to clinical outcomes of patients (improvement or death). There is a significant relationship between intubation and MDR (p-value 0.009). CONCLUSION: MDR patient status affected the outcomes of COVID-19 patients in the ICU. Patients with MDR were more likely to have a poor clinical outcome.

Secondary infection in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a retrospective single-center evaluation

BACKGROUND

Patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) can develop severe illness necessitating intensive care admission. Critically ill patients are susceptible for the development of secondary bacterial infections. Due to a combination of virus- and drug-induced immunosuppression, critically ill patients with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may even have a higher risk of developing a secondary infection. These secondary infections can aggravate the severity of illness and increase the risk of death. Further research on secondary infections in COVID-19 patients is essential. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the incidence and associated risk factors of secondary bacterial infections and to identify the most common groups of pathogens in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

This mono-center, retrospective observational cohort study was performed at the intensive care unit (ICU) of the Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium. All adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU from 13th March 2020 until 17th October 2020, were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data from the resulting 116 patients were prospectively entered into a customized database. The resulting database was retrospectively reviewed to investigate three types of secondary bacterial infections (secondary pneumonia, bloodstream infections of unknown origin, catheter-related sepsis).

RESULTS

Of 94 included patients, 68% acquired at least one of the studied secondary bacterial infections during their ICU stay. Almost two thirds of patients (65.96%, n = 62) acquired a secondary pneumonia, whereas 29.79% (n = 28) acquired a bacteremia of unknown origin and a smaller proportion of patients (14.89%, n = 14) acquired a catheter-related sepsis. Male gender (P = 0.05), diabetes mellitus (P = 0.03) and the cumulative dose of corticosteroids (P = 0.004) were associated with increased risk of secondary bacterial infection. The most common pathogens detected in the cultures of patients with secondary pneumonia were Gram-negative bacilli. Bacteremia of unknown origin and catheter-related sepsis were mostly caused by Gram-positive cocci.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that the incidence of secondary bacterial infections is very high in critically ill COVID-19 patients. These patients are at highest risk of developing secondary pneumonia. Male gender, a history of diabetes mellitus and the administration of corticosteroids were associated with increased risk of secondary bacterial infection.

Altered Ecology of the Respiratory Tract Microbiome and Nosocomial Pneumonia

Nosocomial pneumonia is one of the most frequent infections in critical patients. It is primarily associated with mechanical ventilation leading to severe illness, high mortality, and prolonged hospitalization. The risk of mortality has increased over time due to the rise in multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial infections, which represent a global public health threat. Respiratory tract microbiome (RTM) research is growing, and recent studies suggest that a healthy RTM positively stimulates the immune system and, like the gut microbiome, can protect against pathogen infection through colonization resistance (CR). Physiological conditions of critical patients and interventions as antibiotics administration and mechanical ventilation dramatically alter the RTM, leading to dysbiosis. The dysbiosis of the RTM of ICU patients favors the colonization by opportunistic and resistant pathogens that can be part of the microbiota or acquired from the hospital environments (biotic or built ones). Despite recent evidence demonstrating the significance of RTM in nosocomial infections, most of the host-RTM interactions remain unknown. In this context, we present our perspective regarding research in RTM altered ecology in the clinical environment, particularly as a risk for acquisition of nosocomial pneumonia. We also reflect on the gaps in the field and suggest future research directions. Moreover, expected microbiome-based interventions together with the tools to study the RTM highlighting the "omics" approaches are discussed.

Infection control in the intensive care unit: expert consensus statements for SARS-CoV-2 using a Delphi method

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.

Unresolved issues in the epidemiology and diagnosis of bacteremia: an opinion paper

Bacteremia is an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and, despite the diagnostic and therapeutic advances of the last decades, the evidence supporting many diagnostic aspects of bacteremia is scarce. Information on the epidemiological evolution of this entity is limited and many methodological aspects of blood culture collection and analysis are under discussion. Furthermore, the recommendations of the main scientific societies on many of these aspects are variable and, in many cases, have not been updated recently. In this scenario, we have arranged a series of questions on different aspects of bacteremia and reviewed the literature trying to find proper answers for them. We offer our opinion on the topics where the evidence was weak. The topics covered include epidemiological aspects of bacteremia, indications for blood culture extraction, methods for obtaining and incubating samples, or ways of transmitting results from the microbiology laboratory. We do not intend to summarize the current clinical practice guidelines, nor will we deal with the therapeutic management of this entity. The aim of this paper is to review the current perspective on the diagnosis of bacteremia with a critical approach, to point out the gaps in the literature, to offer the opinion of a team dedicated to infectious diseases and clinical microbiology, and to identify some areas of knowledge on which future studies should focus.

[Management of infectious complications associated with coronavirus infection in severe patients admitted to ICU]

Infections have become one of the main complications of patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted in ICU. Poor immune status, frequent development of organic failure requiring invasive supportive treatments, and prolonged ICU length of stay in saturated structural areas of patients are risk factors for infection development. The Working Group on Infectious Diseases and Sepsis GTEIS of the Spanish Society of Intensive Medicine and Coronary Units SEMICYUC emphasizes the importance of infection prevention measures related to health care, the detection and early treatment of major infections in the patient with SARS-CoV-2 infections. Bacterial co-infection, respiratory infections related to mechanical ventilation, catheter-related bacteremia, device-associated urinary tract infection and opportunistic infections are review in the document.

Bloodstream Infections in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Little is known about the occurrence of bloodstream infections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and the related clinical consequences. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the pooled occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and mortality of this patient population. Methods: A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception to 19 April 2021. The primary outcome was the occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The secondary outcome was mortality at the longest available follow-up. Results: Forty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 42,694 patients evaluated. The estimated occurrence of BSIs was 7.3% (95% CI 4.7–1.1%) among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 41% (95% CI 30%–52.8%). The subgroup analysis conducted on patients admitted to ICU provided an estimated occurrence of 29.6% (95% CI 21.7%–38.8%). A higher occurrence of BSI was observed in patients with COVID-19, in comparison with patients without COVID-19 (OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.53–5.02; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our analysis estimated the occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at around 7%. A four-times higher occurrence was estimated among patients admitted to ICU.

Management of infectious complications associated with coronavirus infection in severe patients admitted to ICU

Infections have become one of the main complications of patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted in ICU. Poor immune status, frequent development of organic failure requiring invasive supportive treatments, and prolonged ICU length of stay in saturated structural areas of patients are risk factors for infection development. The Working Group on Infectious Diseases and Sepsis GTEIS of the Spanish Society of Intensive Medicine and Coronary Units SEMICYUC emphasizes the importance of infection prevention measures related to health care, the detection and early treatment of major infections in the patient with SARS-CoV-2 infections. Bacterial co-infection, respiratory infections related to mechanical ventilation, catheter-related bacteremia, device-associated urinary tract infection and opportunistic infections are review in the document.

Incidence, Risk Factors and Impact on Clinical Outcomes of Bloodstream Infections in Patients Hospitalised with COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study

With the aim of describing the burden and epidemiology of community-acquired/healthcare-associated and hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (CA/HCA-BSIs and HA-BSIs) in patients hospitalised with COVID-19, and evaluating the risk factors for BSIs and their relative impact on mortality, an observational cohort study was performed on patients hospitalised with COVID-19 at San Paolo Hospital in Milan, Italy from 24 February to 30 November 2020. Among 1351 consecutive patients hospitalised with COVID-19, 18 (1.3%) had CA/HCA-BSI and 51 (3.8%) HA-BSI for a total of 82 episodes of BSI. The overall incidence of HA-BSI was 3.3/1000 patient-days (95% CI 2.4-4.2). Patients with HA-BSI had a longer hospital stay compared to CA/HCA-BSI and no-BSI groups (27 (IQR 21-35) vs. 12 (7-29) vs. 9 (5-17) median-days, p < 0.001) but a similar in-hospital mortality (31% vs. 33% vs. 25%, p = 0.421). BSI was not associated with an increased risk of mortality (CA/HCA-BSI vs. non-BSI aOR 1.27 95% CI 0.41-3.90, p = 0.681; HA-BSI vs. non-BSI aOR 1.29 95% CI 0.65-2.54, p = 0.463). Upon multivariate analysis, NIMV/CPAP (aOR 2.09, 95% CI 1.06-4.12, p = 0.034), IMV (aOR 5.13, 95% CI 2.08-12.65, p < 0.001) and corticosteroid treatment (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.06-4.19, p = 0.032) were confirmed as independent factors associated with HA-BSI. Development of HA-BSI did not significantly affect mortality. Patients treated with corticosteroid therapy had double the risk of developing BSI.

Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Infections in ICU COVID-19 Patients-A Scoping Review

Introduction: The spread of multidrug-resistant pathogens is a serious problem and challenge for the whole medical community. Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) infections in immunocompromised patients have a severe course and may be fatal. Increasingly, these bacteria are exhibiting resistance to carbapenem antibiotics, which have been used as so-called drugs of last resort. The emergence of the new coronavirus and the pandemic that it has caused require changes to protect against the spread of the new SARS-CoV-2. These changes paradoxically may contribute to the spread of other infections. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library databases were searched using relevant keywords. A literature review of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infection in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 was conducted according to PRISMA recommendations. A written review protocol was not prepared. Results: 1016 studies in scientific databases were searched. After rejecting duplicate studies, 964 results were obtained. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were then applied, and studies were qualitatively analyzed. Finally, 11 studies were included in the review. The results of infected patients were from six countries. The prevalence of CRKP in Covid-19 patients ranged from 0.35–53%. The majority of CRKP infected patients were male (85%), with a mean age of 61 years. Among isolates, the predominant genes were KPC, OXY-48, CTX-M, TEM, NDM and SHV. Conclusion: The results presented in our review indicate the necessity of paying attention to carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infections in patients with COVID-19. In order to prevent the increase of bacterial resistance, rational antibiotic therapy should be used, as well as continuous control and surveillance of hospital infections caused by multidrug-resistant organisms.

Prevalence and outcomes of co-infection and superinfection with SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The recovery of other pathogens in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection has been reported, either at the time of a SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis (co-infection) or subsequently (superinfection). However, data on the prevalence, microbiology, and outcomes of co-infection and superinfection are limited. The purpose of this study was to examine the occurrence of co-infections and superinfections and their outcomes among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched literature databases for studies published from October 1, 2019, through February 8, 2021. We included studies that reported clinical features and outcomes of co-infection or superinfection of SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. We followed PRISMA guidelines, and we registered the protocol with PROSPERO as: CRD42020189763.

RESULTS

Of 6639 articles screened, 118 were included in the random effects meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of co-infection was 19% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14%-25%, I2 = 98%) and that of superinfection was 24% (95% CI: 19%-30%). Pooled prevalence of pathogen type stratified by co- or superinfection were: viral co-infections, 10% (95% CI: 6%-14%); viral superinfections, 4% (95% CI: 0%-10%); bacterial co-infections, 8% (95% CI: 5%-11%); bacterial superinfections, 20% (95% CI: 13%-28%); fungal co-infections, 4% (95% CI: 2%-7%); and fungal superinfections, 8% (95% CI: 4%-13%). Patients with a co-infection or superinfection had higher odds of dying than those who only had SARS-CoV-2 infection (odds ratio = 3.31, 95% CI: 1.82-5.99). Compared to those with co-infections, patients with superinfections had a higher prevalence of mechanical ventilation (45% [95% CI: 33%-58%] vs. 10% [95% CI: 5%-16%]), but patients with co-infections had a greater average length of hospital stay than those with superinfections (mean = 29.0 days, standard deviation [SD] = 6.7 vs. mean = 16 days, SD = 6.2, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that as many as 19% of patients with COVID-19 have co-infections and 24% have superinfections. The presence of either co-infection or superinfection was associated with poor outcomes, including increased mortality. Our findings support the need for diagnostic testing to identify and treat co-occurring respiratory infections among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The Complexity of Co-Infections in the Era of COVID-19

The current frequency of COVID-19 in a pandemic era ensures that co-infections with a variety of co-pathogens will occur. Generally, there is a low rate of bonafide co-infections in early COVID-19 pulmonary infection as currently appreciated. Reports of high co-infection rates must be tempered by limitations in current diagnostic methods since amplification technologies do not necessarily confirm live pathogen and may be subject to considerable laboratory variation. Some laboratory methods may not exclude commensal microbes. Concurrent serodiagnoses have long been of concern for accuracy in these contexts. Presumed virus co-infections are not specific to COVID-19. The association of influenza viruses and SARS-CoV-2 in co-infection has been considerably variable during influenza season. Other respiratory virus co-infections have generally occurred in less than 10% of COVID-19 patients. Early COVID-19 disease is more commonly associated with bacterial co-pathogens that typically represent usual respiratory micro-organisms. Late infections, especially among severe clinical presentations, are more likely to be associated with nosocomial or opportunistic pathogens given the influence of treatments that can include antibiotics, antivirals, immunomodulating agents, blood products, immunotherapy, steroids, and invasive procedures. As anticipated, hospital care carries risk for multi-resistant bacteria. Overall, co-pathogen identification is linked with longer hospital stay, greater patient complexity, and adverse outcomes. As for other viral infections, a general reduction in the use of empiric antibiotic treatment is warranted. Further insight into co-infections with COVID-19 will contribute overall to effective antimicrobial therapies and disease control.

Characterization of respiratory microbial dysbiosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a global pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the microbial composition of the respiratory tract and other infected tissues as well as their possible pathogenic contributions to varying degrees of disease severity in COVID-19 patients remain unclear. Between 27 January and 26 February 2020, serial clinical specimens (sputum, nasal and throat swab, anal swab and feces) were collected from a cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, including 8 mildly and 15 severely ill patients in Guangdong province, China. Total RNA was extracted and ultra-deep metatranscriptomic sequencing was performed in combination with laboratory diagnostic assays. We identified distinct signatures of microbial dysbiosis among severely ill COVID-19 patients on broad spectrum antimicrobial therapy. Co-detection of other human respiratory viruses (including human alphaherpesvirus 1, rhinovirus B, and human orthopneumovirus) was demonstrated in 30.8% (4/13) of the severely ill patients, but not in any of the mildly affected patients. Notably, the predominant respiratory microbial taxa of severely ill patients were Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC), Staphylococcus epidermidis, or Mycoplasma spp. (including M. hominis and M. orale). The presence of the former two bacterial taxa was also confirmed by clinical cultures of respiratory specimens (expectorated sputum or nasal secretions) in 23.1% (3/13) of the severe cases. Finally, a time-dependent, secondary infection of B. cenocepacia with expressions of multiple virulence genes was demonstrated in one severely ill patient, which might accelerate his disease deterioration and death occurring one month after ICU admission. Our findings point to SARS-CoV-2-related microbial dysbiosis and various antibiotic-resistant respiratory microbes/pathogens in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in relation to disease severity. Detection and tracking strategies are needed to prevent the spread of antimicrobial resistance, improve the treatment regimen and clinical outcomes of hospitalized, severely ill COVID-19 patients.

Bacterial coinfections in coronavirus disease 2019

Bacterial coinfections increase the severity of respiratory viral infections and were frequent causes of mortality in influenza pandemics but have not been well characterized in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this review was to identify the frequency and microbial etiologies of bacterial coinfections that are present upon admission to the hospital and that occur during hospitalization for COVID-19. We found that bacterial coinfections were present in <4% of patients upon admission and the yield of routine diagnostic tests for pneumonia was low. When bacterial coinfections did occur, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Haemophilus influenzae were the most common pathogens and atypical bacteria were rare. Although uncommon upon admission, bacterial infections frequently occurred in patients with prolonged hospitalization, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella spp., and S. aureus were common pathogens. Antibacterial therapy and diagnostic testing for bacterial infections are unnecessary upon admission in most patients hospitalized with COVID-19, but clinicians should be vigilant for nosocomial bacterial infections.

Bacterial superinfection pneumonia in SARS-CoV-2 respiratory failure

Background

Severe community-acquired pneumonia secondary to SARS-CoV-2 is a leading cause of death. Current guidelines recommend patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia receive empirical antibiotic therapy for suspected bacterial superinfection, but little evidence supports these recommendations.

Methods

We obtained bronchoscopic bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples from patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation. We analyzed BAL samples with multiplex PCR and quantitative culture to determine the prevalence of superinfecting pathogens at the time of intubation and identify episodes of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) over the course of mechanical ventilation. We compared antibiotic use with guideline-recommended care.

Results

The 179 ventilated patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia discharged from our hospital by June 30, 2020 were analyzed. 162 (90.5%) patients had at least one BAL procedure; 133 (74.3%) within 48 hours after intubation and 112 (62.6%) had at least one subsequent BAL during their hospitalization. A superinfecting pathogen was identified within 48 hours of intubation in 28/133 (21%) patients, most commonly methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus species (21/28, 75%). BAL-based treatment reduced antibiotic use compared with guideline-recommended care. 72 patients (44.4%) developed at least one VAP episode. Only 15/72 (20.8%) of initial VAPs were attributable to multidrug-resistant pathogens. The incidence rate of VAP was 45.2/1000 ventilator days.

Conclusions

With use of sensitive diagnostic tools, bacterial superinfection at the time of intubation is infrequent in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Treatment based on current guidelines would result in substantial antibiotic overuse. The incidence rate of VAP in ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia are higher than historically reported.