No abstract

What is Known and Objective The 2017 IDSA/SHEA Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) recommend treating recurrent episodes with fidaxomicin or oral vancomycin, but there is little evidence to support one strategy over another, particularly beyond the first recurrence. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with recurrent CDI treated with vancomycin vs. fidaxomicin. Methods This retrospective study evaluated inpatients with recurrent CDI treated with vancomycin or fidaxomicin between 1 January 2013 and 1 May 2019. The primary outcome was CDI recurrence. Secondary outcomes included re‐infection, treatment failure, infection‐related length of stay (IRLOS) and in‐hospital all‐cause mortality (IHACM). The Wilcoxon rank‐sum test, Pearson's chi‐square test or Fisher's exact test was utilized, as appropriate. A multivariable logistic regression (MLR) model was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval assessing recurrence while adjusting for confounding variables. A survival analysis was also conducted. Results 135 patients met the inclusion criteria (35 fidaxomicin vs. 100 vancomycin). There was no difference in CDI recurrence [7 (20%) fidaxomicin vs. 11 (11%) vancomycin, p = 0.18]; this persisted in the MLR model (OR: 0.85 [95% CI 0.27–2.7]) and survival analysis (p = 0.1954). Additionally, there was no difference in re‐infection rate (p = 0.73), treatment failure (p = 0.13), IRLOS (p = 0.19) or IHACM (p = 0.65). What is New and Conclusion This represents the first analysis of CDI recurrence that included patients with >2 prior episodes of CDI. The study found no difference in additional recurrences when patients were treated with oral vancomycin vs fidaxomicin for recurrent CDI. However, the current study is limited by the small sample size available for inclusion. Prospective randomized studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm this study's conclusions.

The primary objectives were to determine the prevalence of and identify variables associated with respiratory bacterial co-infection in COVID-19 inpatients. Secondary outcomes included length of stay and in-hospital mortality. Eighty-two (11.2%) of 735 COVID-19 inpatients had respiratory bacterial co-infection. Fifty-seven patients met inclusion criteria and were matched to three patients lacking co-infection (N = 228 patients). Patients with co-infection were more likely to receive antibiotics [57 (100%) vs. 130 (76%), p < 0.0001] and for a longer duration [19 (13-33) vs. 8 (4-13) days, p <0.0001]. The multi-variable logistic regression model revealed risk factors of respiratory bacterial co-infection to be admission from SNF/LTAC/NH (AOR 6.8, 95% CI 2.6-18.2), severe COVID-19 (AOR 3.03, 95% CI 0.78-11.9), and leukocytosis (AOR 3.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.16). Although respiratory bacterial co-infection is rare in COVID-19 inpatients, antibiotic use is common. Early recognition of respiratory bacterial coinfection predictors in COVID-19 inpatients may improve empiric antibiotic prescribing.

This retrospective single-center cohort study compared retained daptomycin and ceftaroline combination therapy versus de-escalation to vancomycin, daptomycin or ceftaroline monotherapy for MRSA bacteremia. No difference was found in the composite outcome of 60-day bacteremia recurrence, readmission or inpatient infection-related mortality for patients retained on combination therapy versus those de-escalated to monotherapy.

No abstract