No abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the occurrence rate and impact on patient outcomes of probiotic-associated central venous catheter bloodstream infections in the ICU. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: The cohort was gathered using HCA Healthcare’s data warehouse. PATIENTS: Adult patients with central venous catheters in the ICU. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood culture data were used to determine whether an infection had occurred with an organism contained in an administered probiotic. Eighty-six probiotic-associated central venous catheter bloodstream infections were identified among the 23,015 patient cohort who received probiotics (0.37%). The number needed to harm was 270. Zero infections were found in the cohort that did not receive probiotics. Patients who contracted a probiotic infection had increased mortality (odds ratio, 2.23; 1.30–3.71; p < 0.01). Powder formulations had an increased rate of infection compared with nonpowder formulations (0.76% vs 0.33%; odds ratio, 2.03; 1.05–3.95; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Probiotic administration is associated with a substantial rate of probiotic-associated bloodstream infection in ICU patients with central venous catheters in place. Probiotic-associated bloodstream infections result in significantly increased mortality. Powder formulations cause bloodstream infections more frequently than nonpowder formulations. In ICU patients with central venous catheters, the risks of probiotic-associated central venous catheter bloodstream infection and death outweigh any potential benefits of probiotic administration.

Study Objective: Rivaroxaban, enoxaparin, and aspirin are commonly used medications for thromboprophylaxis following lower extremity joint arthroplasty or revision.Previous research has demonstrated efficacy in preventing venous thromboembolism with each medication, however, the comparative risk of bleeding between them remains poorly understood. The aim of this study was to compare the odds of bleeding between rivaroxaban, enoxaparin, and aspirin following lower extremity joint arthroplasty or revision.Design: This is a 3-year retrospective cohort study. Setting: Data were obtained from 148 facilities across 55 states and territories of the United States. Patients: This study included 85,938 patients who underwent hip or knee arthroplasty or revision. Intervention: Patients received enoxaparin, rivaroxaban, or aspirin as monotherapy for thromboprophylaxis. Measurements: The primary outcome was all bleeding, classified as major or minor bleeding, occurring in the 40 days following surgery. The secondary outcome was venous thromboembolism.Main Results: Among 85,938 patients, 10,465 received rivaroxaban, 14,047 received enoxaparin, and 61,426 received aspirin. Bleeding occurred in 126 (1.20%) patients with rivaroxaban, 253 (1.80%) with enoxaparin, and 611 (0.99%) with aspirin. There was a significant increase in odds of bleeding in the enoxaparin compared to aspirin group odds ratio (OR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.38, p = 0.042), and a trend toward increased odds of bleeding in rivaroxaban compared to aspirin group (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.99-1.47, p = 0.058) and rivaroxaban compared to enoxaparin (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82-1.28, p = 0.827). Odds of venous thromboembolism were not statistically significant between all three study medications.Conclusions: Among rivaroxaban, enoxaparin, and aspirin used for thromboprophylaxis in knee and hip arthroplasty or revision, aspirin had significantly decreased odds of bleeding complications compared to enoxaparin. Although not statistically | 609 WATTS eT Al.