The ESC 2023 guidelines for the management of endocarditis stress that a multidisciplinary approach is needed to manage patients with infective endocarditis (IE). In our view the guidelines do not include the relevant perspectives from modern microbiology. The diagnostic criteria for IE were changed in the ESC 2023 guidelines and many IE-causing pathogens are either not clearly defined or not even mentioned. Moreover, the improved understanding of the relation between bacterial species and the risk for IE has not been implemented. The guidelines give detailed, and in our view not correct, instructions about diagnostic testing in blood culture negative IE without presenting proper evidence. Other important diagnostic aspects such as the value of repeated blood cultures and incubation time for blood cultures are not discussed. We believe that a multidisciplinary collaboration, including microbiologists, would have improved these guidelines and we hope for a future harmonization of diagnostic criteria for IE.

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes-related foot diseases since 1999. The present guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes mellitus. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used for the development of this guideline. This was structured around identifying clinically relevant questions in the P(A)ICO format, determining patient-important outcomes, systematically reviewing the evidence, assessing the certainty of the evidence, and finally moving from evidence to the recommendation. This guideline was developed for healthcare professionals involved in diabetes-related foot care to inform clinical care around patient-important outcomes. Two systematic reviews from 2019 were updated to inform this guideline, and a total of 149 studies (62 new) meeting inclusion criteria were identified from the updated search and incorporated in this guideline. Updated recommendations are derived from these systematic reviews, and best practice statements made where evidence was not available. Evidence was weighed in light of benefits and harms to arrive at a recommendation. The certainty of the evidence for some recommendations was modified in this update with a more refined application of the GRADE framework centred around patient important outcomes. This is highlighted in the rationale section of this update. A note is also made where the newly identified evidence did not alter the strength or certainty of evidence for previous recommendations. The recommendations presented here continue to cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infections, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Guidance on how to collect microbiological samples, and how to process them to identify causative pathogens, is also outlined. Finally, we present the approach to treating foot infections in persons with diabetes, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and bone infections; when and how to approach surgical treatment; and which adjunctive treatments may or may not affect the infectious outcomes of diabetes-related foot problems. We believe that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals provide better care for persons with diabetes and foot infections, prevent the number of foot and limb amputations, and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.

Shotgun metagenomics is an increasingly cost-effective approach for profiling environmental and host-associated microbial communities. However, due to the complexity of both microbiomes and the molecular techniques required to analyze them, the reliability and representativeness of the results are contingent upon the field, laboratory, and bioinformatic procedures employed. Here, we consider 15 field and laboratory issues that critically impact downstream bioinformatic and statistical data processing, as well as result interpretation, in bacterial shotgun metagenomic studies. The issues we consider encompass intrinsic properties of samples, study design, and laboratory-processing strategies. We identify the links of field and laboratory steps with downstream analytical procedures, explain the means for detecting potential pitfalls, and propose mitigation measures to overcome or minimize their impact in metagenomic studies. We anticipate that our guidelines will assist data scientists in appropriately processing and interpreting their data, while aiding field and laboratory researchers to implement strategies for improving the quality of the generated results.

暂无摘要。

To establish consensus definitions for necrotising otitis externa (NOE) to facilitate the diagnosis and exclusion of NOE in clinical practice and expedite future high-quality study of this neglected condition.
The work comprised of a systematic review of the literature, five iterative rounds of consultation via a Delphi process and open discussion within the collaborative. An expert panel analysed the results to produce the final outputs which were shared with and endorsed by national specialty bodies.
Secondary care in the UK.
UK clinical specialists practising in infection, ear nose and throat (ENT) surgery or radiology.
Definitions and statements meeting the following criteria were accepted: (a) minimum of 70% of respondents in agreement or strong agreement with a definition/statement AND (b) <15% of respondents in disagreement or strong disagreement with a definition/statement.
Seventy-four UK clinicians specialising in ENT, Infection and Radiology with a special interest in NOE took part in the work which was undertaken between 2019 and 2021. The minimum response rate for a Round was 76%. Consensus criteria for all proposed case definitions, outcome definitions and consensus statements were met in the fifth round.
This work distills the clinical opinion of a large group of multidisciplinary specialists from across the UK to create practical definitions and statements to support clinical practice and research for NOE. This is the first step in an iterative process. Further work will seek to validate and test these definitions and inform their evolution.

OBJECTIVE: Sophisticated scientific methods have facilitated dose individualisation with substantial advancements in therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) practice. It is unclear whether these methods have translated to the clinical setting. This study aimed to determine current TDM practice for tobramycin monitoring in cystic fibrosis (CF) centres in the USA and Canada, UK and Ireland, and Australia and New Zealand due to a high prevalence of CF.
METHODS: A web-based survey was developed and circulated via CF specialist groups within the targeted geographical regions. Themes included centre demographics, tobramycin usage, dosing and infusion practices, TDM practices, and blood sampling methods.
RESULTS: In total 77 responses were received from 75 different CF centres over the 3-month evaluation period (October 2019-January 2020). Respondents were from the USA and Canada (60%), Australia and New Zealand (25%), and the UK and Ireland (15%). Tobramycin was used in 97% of sites, with an international variation in practice across all survey aspects including dosing and infusion practice. TDM-based dose adjustment in the UK and Ireland was most commonly based only on trough sample collection for avoidance of toxicity, where use of computer programs for targeting both efficacy and toxicity endpoints were most common in Australia and New Zealand. The underlying pharmacokinetic basis of that program was not known by 33% of sites who utilised a computer program for tobramycin dose individualisation.
CONCLUSIONS: There remains substantial heterogeneity in tobramycin management worldwide. Despite two decades of research into TDM of tobramycin, there has been a slow uptake of new technologies and evolution of practice. An improved understanding of TDM processes is required for translation of evidence-based research into clinical practice. International guidelines require updating due to the advances in research to support confidence in the changes in clinical practice.

Horses and other equids can be infected with several viruses of the family Flaviviridae, belonging to the genus Flavivirus and Hepacivirus. This consensus statement focuses on viruses with known occurrence in Europe, with the objective to summarize the current literature and formulate clinically relevant evidence-based recommendations regarding clinical disease, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. The viruses circulating in Europe include West Nile virus, tick-borne encephalitis virus, Usutu virus, Louping ill virus and the equine hepacivirus. West Nile virus and Usutu virus are mosquito-borne, while tick-borne encephalitis virus and Louping ill virus are tick-borne. The natural route of transmission for equine hepacivirus remains speculative. West Nile virus and tick-borne encephalitis virus can induce encephalitis in infected horses. In the British Isle, rare equine cases of encephalitis associated with Louping ill virus are reported. In contrast, equine hepacivirus infections are associated with mild acute hepatitis and possibly chronic hepatitis. Diagnosis of flavivirus infections is made primarily by serology, although cross-reactivity occurs. Virus neutralization testing is considered the gold standard to differentiate between flavivirus infections in horses. Hepacivirus infection is detected by serum or liver RT-PCR. No direct antiviral treatment against flavi- or hepacivirus infections in horses is currently available and thus, treatment is supportive. Three vaccines against West Nile virus are licensed in the European Union. Geographic expansion of flaviviruses pathogenic for equids should always be considered a realistic threat, and it would be beneficial if their detection was included in surveillance programs.

暂无摘要。

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, two mainstream guidelines for defining when to end the isolation of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals have been in use: the one-size-fits-all approach (i.e. patients are isolated for a fixed number of days) and the personalized approach (i.e. based on repeated testing of isolated patients). We use a mathematical framework to model within-host viral dynamics and test different criteria for ending isolation. By considering a fixed time of 10 days since symptom onset as the criterion for ending isolation, we estimated that the risk of releasing an individual who is still infectious is low (0-6.6%). However, this policy entails lengthy unnecessary isolations (4.8-8.3 days). In contrast, by using a personalized strategy, similar low risks can be reached with shorter prolonged isolations. The obtained findings provide a scientific rationale for policies on ending the isolation of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals.

暂无摘要。