糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的研究热点与趋势分析

目的 探讨糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的研究现状、热点与前沿。方法 收集Web of Science核心合集于2000年1月1日至2021年11月20日发表的糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的相关文章，运用CiteSpace 5.8.R3软件进行可视化分析。结果 共纳入英文文献148篇，近20年来该领域发文量呈上升趋势。美国发文量最多（46篇, 31.08%），机构间合作情况的可视化分析共得到个340节点、929条连线，网络密度为0.0161，作者间合作关系的知识图谱共得到790个节点、2425条连线，网络密度为0.0078，关键词共现分析结果显示，糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的危险因素、患病率、诊断和治疗是该领域的研究热点和趋势。结论 糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的发文量不断增加，机构间、区域内和国际范围内的合作有待进一步开展。立足国情，探索慢病共病的管理模式将有助于优化共病管理，进一步推动慢病管理的进程。     

Effectiveness and Safety of Inhaled Antibiotics in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Multicentre Observational Study

BackgroundWe aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of inhaled antibiotics in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, as well as the patient profile in which they are usually prescribed and the patient groups that can most benefit from this treatment.MethodsMulticentre retrospective observational cohort study in COPD patients who had received ≥1 dose of inhaled antibiotics in the last 5 years. Clinical data from the two years prior to and subsequent to the start of the treatment were compared. Primary outcome: COPD exacerbations. Secondary outcomes: side effects, symptomatology (sputum purulence, dyspnoea), microbiological profile and pathogen eradication.ResultsOf 693 COPD patients analyzed (aged 74.1; 86.3% men; mean FEV₁ = 43.7%), 71.7% had bronchiectasis and 46.6% presented chronic bronchial infection (CBI) by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA). After 1 year of treatment with inhaled antibiotics, there was a significant decrease in the number of exacerbations (?33.3%; P < .001), hospital admissions (?33.3%; P < .001) and hospitalization days (?26.2%; P = .003). We found no difference in effectiveness between patients with or without associated bronchiectasis. Positive patient outcomes were more pronounced in PA-eradicated patients. We found a significant reduction in daily expectoration (?33.1%; P = .024), mucopurulent/purulent sputum (?53.9%; P < .001), isolation of any potentially pathogenic microorganisms (PPM) (?16.7%; P < .001), CBI by any PPM (?37.4%; P < .001) and CBI by PA (?49.8%; P < .001). CBI by any PPM and ≥three previous exacerbations were associated with a better treatment response. 25.4% of patients presented non-severe side-effects, the most frequent of these being bronchospasm (10.5%), dyspnoea (8.8%) and cough (1.7%).ConclusionsIn COPD patients with multiple exacerbations and/or CBI by any PPM (especially PA), inhaled antibiotics appear to be an effective and safe treatment, regardless of the presence of bronchiectasis.     

Más difícil todavía: tratar una glomerulonefritis rápidamente progresiva grave en el seno de una neumonía por COVID-19

We present the case of a male patient with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, with simultaneous onset of p-ANCA positive rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis. We discuss the different therapeutic possibilities, emphasising the appropriateness of their administration according to the time in the course of the infection.     

Prior surgical fixation of proximal humerus fractures is associated with increased complications following subsequent reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare complication rates between patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) after a prior open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) to those undergoing RSA as a primary treatment for PHFs, glenohumeral osteoarthritis, or rotator cuff tear arthropathy (CTA).MethodsPatients who underwent RSA between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the Mariner database. Patients were separated into 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) RSA for osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear, or CTA (Control-RSA); (2) RSA as a primary treatment for PHF (PHF-RSA); and (3) RSA for patients with prior ORIF of PHFs (ORIF-RSA). Ninety-day medical and 2-year postoperative surgical complications were identified. In addition, patients in the PHF-RSA group were subdivided into those undergoing RSA for PHF within 3 months of the fracture (acute) vs. those treated greater than 3 months from diagnosis (delayed). Multivariate regression was performed to control for differences in comorbidities and demographics.ResultsA total of 30,824 patients underwent primary RSA for arthritis or CTA, 5389 patients underwent RSA as a primary treatment for a PHF, and 361 patients underwent RSA after ORIF of a PHF. ORIF before RSA was associated with an increased risk of overall revision (odds ratio [OR] 2.45, P = .002), infection (OR 2.40, P < .001), instability (OR 2.43, P < .001), fracture (OR 3.24, P = .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.59, P = .008), and readmission (OR 2.55, P = .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. RSA as a primary treatment for PHF was associated with an increased risk of 2-year revision (OR 1.60, P < .001), infection (OR 1.51, P < .001), instability (OR 2.84, P < .001), and fracture (OR 2.54, P < .001) in addition to major medical complications (OR 2.02, P < .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.92, P < .001), 90-day emergency department visits (OR 1.26, P < .001) and 90-day readmission (OR 2.03, P < .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. The ORIF-RSA group had an increased risk of periprosthetic infection (OR 1.94, P = .002) when compared with the PHF-RSA cohort. There were no differences in medical or surgical complications in the RSA-PHF cohort between patients treated in an acute or delayed fashion.ConclusionRSA following ORIF of a PHF is associated with increased complications compared with patients undergoing RSA for nonfracture indications. Prior ORIF of a PHF is also an independent risk factor for postoperative infection after RSA compared with patients who undergo RSA as a primary operation for fracture. The timing of RSA as a primary operation for PHF does not appear to impact the rates of postoperative medical and surgical complications.     

Positive Cultures Can Be Safely Ignored in Revision Arthroplasty Patients That Do Not Meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting Criteria

BackgroundDuring aseptic revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA), one or more cultures may occasionally isolate an organism. The hypothesis of this study was that in a portion of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic failure, culture may isolate an organism(s) that can be left untreated.MethodsAll patients undergoing revision TJA from 2000 to 2017 at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized as aseptic if they were appropriately investigated preoperatively and did not meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria. In the aseptic revision cohort, patients with a single positive culture or multiple cultures positive for different organisms (“organism-positive”) and patients who had negative intraoperative cultures (“organism-negative”) were compared based on demographics, comorbidities, operative details, subsequent reoperations, and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).ResultsIn total, 3,234 International Consensus Meeting–negative aseptic revision TJAs were included, of which 215 patients (6.6%) were organism-positive, 196 (91.2%) had a single positive culture, and 19 (8.8%) were positive for 2 or more distinct organisms (ie, polymicrobial). The most prevalent organisms were coagulase-negative Staphylococci (37.5%), Staphylococcus epidermidis (9.6%), and Cutibacterium acnes (8.0%). Demographics and operative details were comparable between the groups. Using multiple regressions there was no association between culture positivity and the rate of reoperation or PJI.ConclusionIsolation of organisms by culture in patients undergoing revision for aseptic failure was not uncommon. As long as these patients were appropriately investigated preoperatively and PJI was excluded, these findings suggest that culture results may be ignored without subjecting patients to additional antimicrobial treatment.     

Surgical Helmets Used During Total Joint Arthroplasty Harbor Common Pathogens: A Cautionary Note

BackgroundThe use of personal-protection surgical helmet/hood systems is now a part of the standard surgical attire during arthroplasty in North America. There are no protocols for the disinfection of these helmets.MethodsThis is a prospective, single-center, observational study. Helmets worn by 44 members of the surgical team and foreheads of 44 corresponding surgical personnel were swabbed at three distinct time points. In addition, 16 helmets were treated with hypochlorite spray to determine if pathogens could be eliminated. Swabs obtained were processed for culture and next-generation sequencing (NGS).ResultsOf the 132 helmet samples, 97 (73%) yielded bacteria on culture and 94 (71%) had evidence of bacterial–deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) on NGS. Of the swabs sent for bacterial identification at the three time points, at least one from each helmet was positive for a pathogen(s). Of the 132 forehead samples, 124 (93%) yielded bacteria on culture and 103 (78%) had evidence of bacterial-DNA on NGS. The most commonly identified organism from helmets was Cutibacterium acnes (86/132) on NGS and Staphylococcus epidermidis (47/132) on culture. The most commonly identified organism from the foreheads of surgical personnel was Cutibacterium acnes (100/132) on NGS and Staphylococcus epidermidis (70/132) on culture. Sanitization of helmets was totally effective; no swabs taken the following morning for culture and NGS identified any bacteria.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that surgical helmets worn during orthopedic procedures are contaminated with common pathogens that can potentially cause surgical site infections. The findings of this study should at the minimum compel us to develop protocols for the disinfection of these helmets.