Acute subdural hematoma (aSDH) is among the most common injury types encountered by neurosurgeons, and carries a poor prognosis, particularly in the elderly. As the incidence of aSDH in the elderly population rises, identifying those patients who may benefit from operative intervention is crucial. This systematic review aimed to identify data on prognostic factors or indices, such as the modified frailty index, that may help predict outcome, and hence guide management. A comprehensive search of online databases was conducted by two independent authors, and data on prognostic factors and outcomes were extracted. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Of 769 studies identified in the initial search, 7 satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria. Mortality and morbidity varied considerably among studies. Initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 3-8 was the most consistently reported negative prognostic feature. Several studies evaluated the impact of medical comorbidities and premorbid frailty, but were limited by small sample size. A previous history of pneumonia was shown to increase the risk of Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) 1-3 (odds ratio [OR] 6.4 [95% CI 1.6-25.2], p = 0.04) in a single study, which also reported a greater increase in GOS at 3 months in those with fewer than five comorbidities (56% vs. 19%, p < 0.01). There are limited data describing prognostic factors or the use of frailty indices within the specific group of elderly patients with aSDH. Prospective research is needed to evaluate the utility of accurate and validated assessments of frailty to enhance the neurosurgeon's ability to appropriately manage this complex and expanding patient group.

In 2021, the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), the Infectious Diseases Society of America in conjunction with the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (IDSA/SHEA), and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) published updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of Clostridioides difficile infections. The differences, sometimes subtle, between these guideline recommendations have caused some debate among clinicians. This paper delves into select key recommendations from each respective CPG and analyzes the differences and evidence associated with each. One primary difference between the CPGs is the preference given to fidaxomicin over vancomycin for initial treatment in non-severe and severe disease endorsed by IDSA/SHEA and ESCMID guidelines, while the ACG-sponsored CPGs do not offer a preference. The emphasis on cost effective data was also a noticeable difference between the CPGs and thus interpretation of the available evidence. When using guidelines to help support local practice or institutional treatment pathways, clinicians should carefully balance CPG recommendations with local patient populations and feasibility of implementation, especially when multiple guidelines for the same disease state exist.

Prompt treatment of candidemia, especially in immunocompromised hosts, is known to improve outcomes. We present a case of discordance among results of Gram stain, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based rapid diagnostic technology, and conventional cultures that subsequently resulted in delayed therapy and hospitalization. An immunocompromised patient presented to the outpatient oncology clinic with signs and symptoms of systemic infection. Blood cultures were obtained, and Gram stain showed gram-negative rods, while multiplex PCR results (BioFire® FilmArray® BCID 1) returned positive for both Enterobacter cloacae and Candida parapsilosis. Conventional cultures only grew E. cloacae. Because of the discordant results, the primary team elected to give ertapenem monotherapy and defer antifungal therapy. The patient’s symptoms progressed, and 11 days later, the patient was admitted with subsequent positive blood cultures for C. parapsilosis. The patient required a 9-day hospitalization due to complications associated with candidemia. This case highlights the value of understanding and interpretation of rapid diagnostics, shared decision-making in antimicrobial management of high-risk patients, and the important responsibility of antimicrobial stewardship teams across the continuum of care.

No abstract