Contribution of Genetic and Clinical Risk Factors to Development of Candidemia in Patients Receiving Home Parenteral Nutrition.
- 作者列表："Wouters Y","Roelofs HMJ","Netea MG","Te Morsche RHM","Wanten GJA
BACKGROUND:Patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN) have an increased risk for central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), including candidemia. Recently, 7 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in TLR1, CD58, LCE4A-Clorf68, and TAGAP have been associated with the development of candidemia. Identification of host-genetic as well as clinical risk factors may help to identify patients who have an increased susceptibility to such infections. The aim of this study was to investigate the relevance of the reported SNPs in patients receiving HPN, and to explore clinical risk factors associated with candidemia. METHODS:We analyzed blood samples of adult patients who started HPN between 1976 and 2017 at our referral center for intestinal failure. Primary outcome was the association between TLR1, CD58, LCE4A-Clorf68, or TAGAP SNPs and candidemia. Secondary outcomes included the relation between severity of infection and these SNPs, and clinical risk factors for candidemia. RESULTS:Of 341 included patients, 42 (12%) experienced a candidemia (range 1-6). None of the 7 SNPs were associated with candidemia or the severity of infection. The rate of non-Candida-related CLABSIs was significantly associated with candidemia (rate ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.14-1.46; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:None of 7 known SNPs in TLR1, CD58, LCE4A-Clorf68, or TAGAP were associated with candidemia or severity of infection in patients receiving HPN. The rate of non-Candida-related CLABSIs was significantly associated with the development of candidemia. The latter supports the key role of aseptic catheter handling with respect to Candida susceptibility in patients receiving HPN.
背景: 接受家庭肠外营养 (HPN) 的患者发生中央系相关血流感染 (CLABSIs) 的风险增加，包括念珠菌血症。最近，TLR1 、 CD58 、 LCE4A-Clorf68 和 TAGAP 的 7 个单核苷酸多态性 (SNPs) 与念珠菌血症的发生相关。确定宿主遗传以及临床危险因素可能有助于确定对此类感染易感性增加的患者。本研究的目的是调查接受 HPN 患者中报告的 SNPs 的相关性，并探讨与念珠菌血症相关的临床危险因素。 方法: 我们分析了 1976年和 2017 年在我们的肠衰竭转诊中心开始 HPN 的成人患者的血液样本。主要结果是 TLR1 、 CD58 、 LCE4A-Clorf68 或 TAGAP SNPs 与念珠菌血症的相关性。次要结局包括感染严重程度与这些 SNPs 之间的关系，以及念珠菌血症的临床危险因素。 结果: 在 341 例纳入的患者中，42 例 (12%) 发生念珠菌血症 (范围 1-6)。7 个 SNPs 均与念珠菌血症或感染严重程度无关。非念珠菌相关 CLABSIs 的发生率与念珠菌血症显著相关 (rate ratio，1.29; 95% CI，1.14-1.46; P
METHODS:OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the effect of esophageal stimulation on nutritional adequacy in critically ill patients at risk for enteral feeding intolerance. DESIGN:A multicenter randomized sham-controlled clinical trial. SETTING:Twelve ICUs in Canada. PATIENTS:We included mechanically ventilated ICU patients who were given moderate-to-high doses of opioids and expected to remain alive and ventilated for an additional 48 hours and who were receiving enteral nutrition or expected to start imminently. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to esophageal stimulation via an esophageal stimulating catheter (E-Motion Tube; E-Motion Medical, Tel Aviv, Israel) or sham treatment. All patients were fed via these catheters using a standardized feeding protocol. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:The co-primary outcomes were proportion of caloric and protein prescription received enterally over the initial 7 days following randomization. Among 159 patients randomized, the modified intention-to-treat analysis included 155 patients: 73 patients in the active treatment group and 82 in the sham treatment group. Over the 7-day study period, the percent of prescribed caloric intake (± SE) received by the enteral route was 64% ± 2 in the active group and 65% ± 2 in sham patients for calories (difference, -1; 95% CI, -8 to 6; p = 0.74). For protein, it was 57% ± 3 in the active group and 60% ± 3 in the sham group (difference, -3; 95% CI, -10 to 3; p = 0.30). Compared to the sham group, there were more serious adverse events reported in the active treatment group (13 vs 6; p = 0.053). Clinically important arrhythmias were detected by Holter monitoring in 36 out of 70 (51%) in the active group versus 22 out of 76 (29%) in the sham group (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS:Esophageal stimulation via a special feeding catheter did not improve nutritional adequacy and was associated with increase risk of harm in critically ill patients.
METHODS:RATIONALE:The long-term effects of delivering approximately 100% of recommended calorie intake via the enteral route during critical illness compared to a lesser amount of calories are unknown. OBJECTIVES:Our hypotheses were that achieving approximately 100% of recommended calorie intake during critical illness would increase quality of life scores, return to work and key life activities and reduce death and disability six months later. METHODS:We conducted a multicenter, blinded, parallel group, randomized clinical trial, with 3957 mechanically ventilated critically ill adults allocated to energy-dense (1.5 kcal/ml) or routine (1.0 kcal/ml) enteral nutrition. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Participants assigned energy-dense nutrition received more calories (% recommended energy intake, mean (SD) (energy-dense: 103% (28) vs. usual: 69% (18)). Mortality at day-180 was similar (560/1895 (29.6%) vs. 539/1920 (28.1%); relative risk 1.05 (95%CI, 0.95 to 1.16)). At a median [IQR] of 185 [182, 193] days after randomization, 2492 survivors were surveyed and reported similar quality of life (EuroQol five dimensions five-level quality of life questionnaire visual analogue scale, median [IQR]: 75 [60-85]; group difference: 0 (95%CI, 0 to 0)). Similar numbers of participants returned to work with no difference in hours worked or effectiveness at work (n=818). There was no observed difference in disability (n=1208) or participation in key life activities (n=705). CONCLUSIONS:The delivery of approximately 100% compared to 70% of recommended calorie intake during critical illness does not improve quality of life, or functional outcomes, or increase the number of survivors six months later. Clinical trial registration available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT02306746.
METHODS:BACKGROUND:Provision of enteral nutrition with jejunal feeding in upper gastrointestinal obstruction is highly recommended. Access to jejunum can be obtained surgically, percutaneously, or endoscopically. Our institution routinely and preferentially utilizes a silicone nasojejunal tube that is inserted past the obstruction endoscopically. We use a custom dual channel tube that allows feeding at the distal tip and another channel 40 cm from the tip that enables decompression proximally. This is a report of our experience with this custom nasojejunal tube. METHODS:This is a prospective observational study of 201 patients who underwent endoscopic nasojejunal wire-guided feeding tube insertions for obstruction of either the esophagus or the stomach including both benign and malignant pathologies between January 2015 to June 2018 in Hospital Sungai Buloh and Hospital Sultanah Aminah, Malaysia. The indications for tube insertion, insertion technique, and tube-related problems were described. RESULTS:The nasojejunal tube was used to establish enteral feeding in patients with obstructing tumors of the distal esophagus in 65 patients (32.3%) and gastric outlet obstruction in 72 patients (35.8%). There were 54 patients (26.9%) who required reinsertion. The most common reason for reinsertion was unintentional dislodgement, where 32 patients (15.9%) followed by tube blockage 20 patients (10.0%). Using our method of advancement under direct vision, we had only 2 cases of malposition due to severely deformed anatomy. We had no incidence of aspiration in this group of patients and overall, the patients tolerated the tube well. CONCLUSIONS:The novel nasojejunal feeding tube with gastric decompression function is a safe and effective method of delivery of enteral nutrition in patients with upper gastrointestinal obstruction. These tubes if inserted properly are well tolerated with almost no risk of malposition and are tolerated well even for prolonged periods of time until definitive surgery could be performed.