Objectives: Timeliness of antibiotic administration is recognized as an important factor in reducing mortality associated with sepsis. According to guidelines, antibiotics should be administered within 1 hour of sepsis presentation and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services mandates administration within 3 hours. This study evaluates the difference in time from sepsis diagnosis to first-dose completion of β-lactam antibiotics between IV push and IV piggyback administration. Design: Single-center, retrospective analysis. Setting: Urban, tertiary-care emergency department. Patients: Inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) adult patients (n = 274) diagnosed with severe sepsis or septic shock per Sepsis-2 criteria from September to November 2016 and from September to November 2017 and 2) received β-lactam antibiotic. Interventions: Initial β-lactam agent administered as either IV push or IV piggyback. Measurements and Main Results: Median time (interquartile range) from sepsis diagnosis to administration of a β-lactam antibiotic was 48 minutes (19–96 min) versus 72 minutes (8–180 min) and to administration of the complete broad-spectrum regimen was 108 minutes (66–144 min) versus 114 minutes (42–282 min) in the IV push (n = 143) versus IV piggyback (n = 131) groups, respectively. When controlling for time to sepsis diagnosis and other factors, IV push was associated with approximately 32-minute time savings to β-lactam (β = –0.60; 95% CI, –0.91 to –0.29) and approximately 32-minute time savings to broad-spectrum (β = –0.32; 95% CI, –0.62 to –0.02) antibiotic administrations. The IV push group was less likely to fail the goal of β-lactam antibiotics within 1 hour (44.6% vs 57.3%; odds ratio, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.34–3.86) and 3 hours (7.6% vs 24.5%; odds ratio, 4.31; 95% CI, 2.01–10.28) of sepsis diagnosis compared with IV piggyback. The IV push strategy did not affect mortality, need for ICU admission, or ICU length of stay. No adverse events, including infusion reactions, were found in either arm. Conclusions: Use of an IV push strategy may safely facilitate more rapid administration of β-lactam antibiotics and may allow for better compliance with sepsis management guidelines.

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the risk of maintenance immunosuppression on the post-transplant risk of malignancy across all solid organ transplant types.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study from a multicenter hospital system in the United States. The electronic health record was queried from 2000 to 2021 for cases of solid organ transplant, immunosuppressive medications, and post-transplant malignancy.ResultsA total of 5,591 patients, 6,142 transplanted organs, and 517 post-transplant malignancies were identified. Skin cancer was the most common type of malignancy at 52.8%, whereas liver cancer was the first malignancy to present at a median time of 351 days post-transplant. Heart and lung transplant recipients had the highest rate of malignancy, but this finding was not significant upon adjusting for immunosuppressive medications (heart HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 – 1.3, p = 0.88; lung HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.77 – 1.33, p = 0.94). Random forest variable importance calculations and time-dependent multivariate cox proportional hazard analysis identified an increased risk of cancer in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy with sirolimus (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05 – 1.9, p = 0.04), azathioprine (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.58 – 2.79, p < 0.001), and cyclosporine (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.17 – 2.17, p = 0.007), while tacrolimus (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44 – 0.81, p < 0.001) was associated with low rates of post-transplant neoplasia.ConclusionOur results show varying risks of immunosuppressive medications associated with the development of post-transplant malignancy, demonstrating the importance of cancer detection and surveillance strategies in solid organ transplant recipients.