BackgroundThe consumption of carbapenems has increased worldwide, together with the increase in resistant gram negative bacilli. Subsequently, the prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter infections has increased rapidly and become a significant problem particularly in intensive care unit patients. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the changes in the prevalence of Acinetobacter infection by restricting the consumption of carbapenems in intensive care unit patients.MethodsThis study was conducted between May 1, 2011 and February 28, 2013. The amount of carbapenem consumption and the number of patients with multi-drug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDRAB) isolates during the study period were retrospectively obtained from the records of the patients, who were hospitalized in the intensive care unit. The study period was divided into two periods named as: Carbapenem non-restricted period (CNRP) and carbapenem-restricted period (CRP). During CNRP, no restrictions were made on the use of carbapenems. During CRP, the use of carbapenems was not allowed if there was an alternative to carbapenems. Primary Endpoint: MDRAB infection after ICU admission. The definition of nosocomial infections related to Acinetobacter spp. was based on the criteria of the Center for Disease Control (CDC). The correlation between the amount of carbapenem consumption and the number of infections with MDRAB strains between the two periods were evaluated.ResultsDuring the study period, a total of 1822 patients’ (1053 patients in CNRP and 769 patients in CRP) records were evaluated retrospectively. A total of 10.82 defined daily dose (DDD/100 ICU days) of anti-pseudomonal carbapenem were used in CNRP, and this figure decreased to 6.95 DDD/100 ICU days in CRP. In the 8-month CNRP, 42 (3.98%) MDRAB-related nosocomial infections were detected, and 14 (1.82%) infections were detected in CRP (p = 0.012).ConclusionThe prevalence of MDRAB strains isolated in the CNRP was 2.24-fold higher than the prevalence in the CRP. The prevalence of Acinetobacter infections can be reduced by taking strict isolation measures as well as by implementing good antibiotics usage policy.
Aim:In 2009, a flu pandemic caused panic worldwide. Oseltamivir and zanamivir were widely used in this pandemic. Currently, there are a limited number of studies comparing the efficacy and tolerability of these two drugs. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of these two drugs in the treatment of influenza.Materials and Methods:Patients diagnosed with influenza at our infectious disease outpatient clinic during the influenza season between October 1, 2009 and February 1, 2010 were included in the study. Study data were obtained retrospectively from files for consecutive patients. A total of 136 subjects were selected. After exclusion criteria were applied, 56 subjects were discarded. The information for 80 patients in whom oseltamivir or zanamivir therapy was initiated (40 for each therapy) was compiled, and the efficacy and tolerability of the drugs were compared.Results:There was no significant difference in efficacy for the two drugs (P > 0.05). Temperature normalization was significantly faster in patients taking zanamivir (P = 0.0157). Drowsiness was the most frequent adverse event for both drugs (38% for the oseltamivir group, and 22% for the zanamivir group). Respiratory distress was observed in five patients in the zanamivir group, whereas it was not observed in patients in the oseltamivir group (P < 0.05). One patient had to discontinue therapy in the zanamivir group due to respiratory distress.Conclusion:Efficacy (in terms of symptom relief and duration to resumption of work) and adverse events were similar for zanamivir and oseltamivir, but temperature normalization was much more rapid in patients using zanamivir. Patients using zanamivir should be monitored for respiratory distress.
The case presented is the first patient with concurrent acute interstitial pneumonia and pulmonary embolism associated with combined treatment of peginterferon and ribavirin for hepatitis C.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.