Michael Koller

BACKGROUND: The burden and timeline of posttransplant infections are not comprehensively documented in the current era of immunosuppression and prophylaxis. METHODS: In this prospective study nested within the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study (STCS), all clinically relevant infections were identified by transplant-infectious diseases physicians in persons receiving solid organ transplant (SOT) between May 2008 and December 2014 with ≥12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Among 3541 SOT recipients, 2761 (1612 kidney, 577 liver, 286 lung, 213 heart, and 73 kidney-pancreas) had ≥12 months of follow-up; 1520 patients (55%) suffered 3520 infections during the first year posttransplantation. Burden and timelines of clinically relevant infections differed between transplantations. Bacteria were responsible for 2202 infections (63%) prevailing throughout the year, with a predominance of Enterobacteriaceae (54%) as urinary pathogens in heart, lung, and kidney transplant recipients, and as digestive tract pathogens in liver transplant recipients. Enterococcus spp (20%) occurred as urinary tract pathogens in kidney transplant recipients and as digestive tract pathogens in liver transplant recipients, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9%) in lung transplant recipients. Among 1039 viral infections, herpesviruses predominated (51%) in kidney, liver, and heart transplant recipients. Among 263 fungal infections, Candida spp (60%) prevailed as digestive tract pathogens in liver transplant recipients. Opportunistic pathogens, including Aspergillus fumigatus (1.4%) and cytomegalovirus (6%), were rare, scattering over 12 months across all SOT recipients. CONCLUSIONS: In the current era of immunosuppression and prophylaxis, SOT recipients experience a high burden of infections throughout the first year posttransplantation, with rare opportunistic pathogens and a predominance of bacteria.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative adynamic bowel atony interferes with recovery following abdominal surgery. Prokinetic pharmacologic drugs are widely used to accelerate postoperative recovery. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic acting prokinetic drugs to treat postoperative adynamic ileus in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: Trials were identified by computerised searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group specialised register. The reference lists of included trials and review articles were tracked and authors contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled parallel-group trials (RCT) comparing the effect of systemically acting prokinetic drugs against placebo or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed trial quality. Trial authors were contacted for additional information if needed. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine RCTs met the inclusion criteria contributing a total of 4615 participants. Most trials enrolled a small number of patients and showed moderate to poor (reporting of) methodological quality, in particular regarding allocation concealment and intention-to-treat analysis. Fifteen systemic acting prokinetic drugs were investigated and ten comparisons could be summarized. Six RCTs support the effect of Alvimopan, a novel peripheral mu receptor antagonist. However, the trials do not meet reporting guidelines and the drug is still in an investigational stage. Erythromycin showed homogenous and consistent absence of effect across all included trials and outcomes. The evidence is insufficient to recommend the use of cholecystokinin-like drugs, cisapride, dopamine-antagonists, propranolol or vasopressin. Effects are either inconsistent across outcomes, or trials are too small and often of poor methodological quality. Cisapride has been withdrawn from the market due to adverse cardiac events in many countries. Intravenous lidocaine and neostigmine might show a potential effect, but more evidence on clinically relevant outcomes is needed. Heterogeneity among included trials was seen in 10 comparisons. No major adverse drug effects were evident. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Alvimopan may prove to be beneficial but proper judgement needs adherence to reporting standards. Further trials are needed on intravenous lidocaine and neostigmine. The remaining drugs can not be recommended due to lack of evidence or absence of effect.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes following implementation of a checklist with criteria for switching from intravenous (iv) to oral antibiotics on unselected patients on two general medical wards. METHODS: During a 12 month intervention study, a printed checklist of criteria for switching on the third day of iv treatment was placed in the medical charts. The decision to switch was left to the discretion of the attending physician. Outcome parameters of a 4 month control phase before intervention were compared with the equivalent 4 month period during the intervention phase to control for seasonal confounding (before-after study; April to July of 2006 and 2007, respectively): 250 episodes (215 patients) during the intervention period were compared with the control group of 176 episodes (162 patients). The main outcome measure was the duration of iv therapy. Additionally, safety, adherence to the checklist, reasons against switching patients and antibiotic cost were analysed during the whole year of the intervention (n = 698 episodes). RESULTS: In 38% (246/646) of episodes of continued iv antibiotic therapy, patients met all criteria for switching to oral antibiotics on the third day, and 151/246 (61.4%) were switched. The number of days of iv antibiotic treatment were reduced by 19% (95% confidence interval 9%-29%, P = 0.001; 6.0-5.0 days in median) with no increase in complications. The main reasons against switching were persisting fever (41%, n = 187) and absence of clinical improvement (41%, n = 185). CONCLUSIONS: On general medical wards, a checklist with bedside criteria for switching to oral antibiotics can shorten the duration of iv therapy without any negative effect on treatment outcome. The criteria were successfully applied to all patients on the wards, independently of the indication (empirical or directed treatment), the type of (presumed) infection, the underlying disease or the group of antibiotics being used.