Search

Background Linezolid-induced myelosuppression limits optimal therapy in cardiosurgical patients with deep-seated infections at current doses. Methods Adult patients who received a cardiac surgery intervention and linezolid for a documented or presumed serious gram-positive infection were evaluated. Therapeutic monitoring data, dosing, concomitant medications, and other pertinent laboratory data were collected retrospectively. A population pharmacokinetic model was constructed to identify covariates and test potential drug–drug interactions that may account for interpatient variability. Simulations from the final model identified doses that achieve a target therapeutic trough concentration of 2–8 mg/L. Results This study included 150 patients (79.3% male) with sepsis and hospital-acquired pneumonia in 71.7% as the primary indication. The population had a median (minimum–maximum) age, body weight, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 66 (30–85) years, 76 (45–130) kg, and 46.8 (4.9–153.7) mL/minute, respectively. The standard linezolid dosage regimen achieved the therapeutic range in only 54.7% of patients. Lower-than-standard doses were necessary in the majority of patients (77%). A 2-compartment Michaelis-Menten clearance model with weight, kidney function, and the number of interacting drugs identified as covariates that best fit the concentration-time data was used. Cyclosporine had the greatest effect on lowering the maximum elimination rate (Vmax) of linezolid. Empiric linezolid doses of 300–450 mg every 12 hours based on eGFR and the number of interacting medications are suggested by this analysis. Conclusions Lower empiric linezolid doses in cardiosurgical patients may avoid toxicities. Confirmatory studies are necessary to verify these potential drug interactions.

Background: There is limited information to compare the qualitative and semi-quantitative performance of rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and serology for the assessment of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therefore, the objective of the study was (a) to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection between RDT and laboratory serology, trying to identify appropriate semi-quantitative cut-offs for RDT in relation with quantitative serology values and to (b) evaluate diagnostic accuracy of RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in an unselected adult population. Methods: SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were simultaneously measured with lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFA), the Cellex qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test (by capillary blood), the iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (by venous blood) and the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) in samples from in- and out-patients with confirmed, suspected and negative diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) attending Udine Hospital (Italy) (March-May 2020). Interpretation of RDT was qualitative (positive/negative) and semi-quantitative based on a chromatographic intensity scale (negative, weak positive, positive). Results: Overall, 720 paired antibody measures were performed on 858 patients. The qualitative and semiquantitative agreement analysis performed in the whole sample between LFA and CLIA provided a Kendall’s tau of 0.578 (p Conclusion: The RDT used in our study can be a non-invasive and reliable alternative to serological tests and facilitate both qualitative and a semi-quantitative antibody detection in COVID-19.

We aimed to assess the attitude towards influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccinations among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recovered patients. We performed a cross-sectional study consisting of a standardized telephone interview carried out between September and November 2020 targeting a cohort of adult in- and out-patients that had recovered from COVID-19 after the first wave (March–May 2020) at Udine Hospital (Italy). Overall, 599 people participated (320 female, median age 53 years) and most had experienced an acute COVID-19 with mild illness (409, 68.3%). The majority were hesitant or undecided towards influenza (327, 54.6%) and SARS-CoV-2 (353, 59.2%) vaccines. Older age, public work exposure, and previous 2019 flu shots were the main factors associated with a positive attitude toward both vaccinations (p &lt, 0.05). Being hospitalized during the acute COVID-19 phase was associated with the willingness to get a flu shot (94/272, 34.5%) but not SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (70/244, 28.7%). Vaccine hesitancy is diffuse and multifactorial also among COVID-19 recovered.

Objectives To assess the prevalence of and factors associated with post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) syndrome 6 months after the onset. Methods A bidirectional prospective study. Interviews investigated symptoms potentially associated with COVID-19 6 months after the disease onset of all consecutive adult inpatients and outpatients with COVID-19 attending Udine Hospital (Italy) from March to May 2020. IgG antibodies against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were also evaluated 6 months after the onset of symptoms, at the time of the interview. Results A total of 599 individuals were included (320 female, 53.4%; mean age 53 years, SD 15.8) and interviewed 187 days (22 SD) after onset. The prevalence of post-COVID-19 syndrome was 40.2% (241/599). The presence of IgG antibodies was significantly associated with the occurrence of post-COVID-19 syndrome (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.48–4.38, p 0.001) and median SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres were significantly higher in patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome than in patients without symptoms (42.1, IQR 17.1–78.4 vs. 29.1, IQR 12.1–54.2 kAU/L, p 0.004). Female gender (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.05–2.27), a proportional increase in the number of symptoms at the onset of COVID-19 (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.59–2.05) and ICU admission OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.18–8.11) were all independent risk factors for post-COVID-19 syndrome. The same predictors also emerged in a subgroup of 231 patients with the serological follow-up available at the time of the interview alongside the proportional increase in anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00–1.02, p 0.04). Discussion Prospective follow-up could be offered to specific subgroups of COVID-10 patients, to identify typical symptoms and persistently high anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres as a means of early detection of post-COVID-19 long-term sequelae.

Mid Regional pro-ADM (MR-proADM) is a promising novel biomarker in the evaluation of deteriorating patients and an emergent prognosis factor in patients with sepsis, septic shock and organ failure. It can be induced by bacteria, fungi or viruses. We hypothesized that the assessment of MR-proADM, with or without other inflammatory cytokines, as part of a clinical assessment of COVID-19 patients at hospital admission, may assist in identifying those likely to develop severe disease. A pragmatic retrospective analysis was performed on a complete data set from 111 patients admitted to Udine University Hospital, in northern Italy, from 25th March to 15th May 2020, affected by SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Clinical scoring systems (SOFA score, WHO disease severity class, SIMEU clinical phenotype), cytokines (IL-6, IL-1b, IL-8, TNF-α), and MR-proADM were measured. Demographic, clinical and outcome data were collected for analysis. At multivariate analysis, high MR-proADM levels were significantly associated with negative outcome (death or orotracheal intubation, IOT), with an odds ratio of 4.284 [1.893–11.413], together with increased neutrophil count (OR = 1.029 [1.011–1.049]) and WHO disease severity class (OR = 7.632 [5.871–19.496]). AUROC analysis showed a good discriminative performance of MR-proADM (AUROC: 0.849 [95% Cl 0.771–0.730]; p