1,721,204 research outputs found

    MDR/XDR/PDR or DTR? Which definition best fits the resistance profile of Pseudomonas aeruginosa ?

    Full text link
    Purpose of reviewThe aim of this narrative review is to compare the prognostic utility of the new definition of difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) vs. established definitions in patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection to understand the therapeutic implications of resistance classification and its impact on clinical outcome.Recent findingsAmong Gram-negative bacteria (GNB), P. aeruginosa (PA) is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality, mostly related to its intrinsic capacity of developing antibiotic resistance. Several classifications of antibiotic resistance have been proposed in the last 15 years. The most common used is that from Magiorakos et al. including multidrug resistance (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR) and pan drug resistance (PDR) according to the number of antibiotic classes showing in vitro activity. A further classification based on the resistance to specific antibiotic classes (i.e. fluoroquinolones, cephalosporins, carbapenem resistance) was also proposed. However, both of them have been criticized because of limited usefulness in clinical practice and for poor correlation with patient outcome, mainly in infections due to PA. More recently the new definition of difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) has been proposed referring to nonsusceptibility to all first-line agents showing high-efficacy and low-toxicity (i.e. carbapenems, β-lactam-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations, and fluoroquinolones). Studies including large cohorts of patients with GNB bloodstream infections have confirmed the prognostic value of DTR classification and its clinical usefulness mainly in infections due to PA. Indeed, in the recent documents from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) on the management of antibiotic resistant GNB infections, the DTR classification was applied to PA.SummaryDTR definition seems to identify better than MDR/XDR/PDR and single class resistant categories the cases of PA with limited treatment options. It requires periodic revision in order to remain up-to-date with the introduction of new antibiotics and the evolving pattern of resistance

    Recurrence of skin and soft tissue infections: identifying risk factors and treatment strategies

    Full text link
    Purpose of reviewRecurrent skin and soft tissue infections (RSSTIs) are challenging for the clinicians due to morbidity and healthcare-related costs. Here, we review updates on risk factors and management.Recent findingsRSSTIs rates range between 7 and 45%. Local and systemic conditions can favour RSSTIs, with comorbidities such as obesity, diabetes, cancer and immunosuppressive disease becoming increasingly relevant. Streptococcus spp. and Staphylococcus aures (including methicillin resistant, MRSA) are the leading causative pathogens of RSSTIs, but also Gram-negative bacteria and polymicrobial infection should be considered. To prevent recurrences, treatment of underlying predisposing factor, complete source control and appropriate antibiotic therapy are crucial. Antibiotic prophylaxis for recurrent erysipelas and decolonization for MRSA carriers demonstrated some advantages, but also long-term loss of efficacy and possible adverse effects. Clinical score and patients risk stratification could be useful tools to target prophylaxis and decolonization strategies. To reduce hospitalization rates and costs, outpatient oral and parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) and long-acting antibiotics are being implemented.SummaryManagement of RSSTIs requires both preventive interventions on modifiable risk factors and pharmacological strategies, with a patient tailored approach
    corecore