View clinical trials related to Bloodstream Infections.
Filter by:Prospective observational study designed to describe the clinical, laboratory, imaging, microbiological characteristics and treatment of specific infectious diseases, with the addition of a dedicated biobank.
In this before-after study, different new methods for bacterial species identification from positive blood cultures will be compared towards historic controls. All samples are analyzed within the routine workflow for bacterial species identification and antibiotic resistance profiling. Patients with positive blood cultures from 2016 to 2018 receiving a conventional identification methods (controls) will be compared to patients from 2018 and 2019 with a new identification method (cases). The conventional identification method consisted in general of an over-night subculture and subsequent identification of the bacterial pathogen using either biochemical profiling or Matrix-assisted Laser-Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight (MALDI-TOF MS). The new identification of positive blood cultures methods include (i) either the newly introduced Biofire FilmArray© Blood Culture Identification (BCID) panel or (ii) in a subset of patients whole genome sequencing (WGS) approaches.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether a new antibiotic, Cefiderocol which works against a wide variety of gram negative bacteria, is equally effective as the antibiotics that are currently used as current standard of care.
Infections of the blood are extremely serious and require intravenous antibiotic treatment. When the infection results from antibiotic resistant bacteria, the choice of antibiotic is an extremely important decision. Some types of bacteria produce enzymes that may inactivate essential antibiotics, related to penicillin, called 'beta-lactams'. Furthermore high level production of these enzymes can occur during therapy and lead to clinical failure, even when an antibiotic appears effective by laboratory testing. However, this risk of this occurring in clinical practice has only been well described in a limited range of antibiotic classes in a type of bacteria called Enterobacter. There is currently uncertainty as to whether a commonly used, and highly effective antibiotic, called piperacillin-tazobactam is subject to the same risk of resistance developing while on treatment. Infections caused by Enterobacter (and other bacteria with similar resistance mechanisms) are often treated with an alternative drug called meropenem (a carbapenem antibiotic), which is effective but has an extremely broad-spectrum of activity. Excessive use of carbapenems is driving further resistance to this antibiotic class - which represent our 'lastline' of antibiotic defence. As such, we need studies to help us see whether alternatives to meropenem are an effective and safe choice. No study has ever directly tested whether these two antibiotics have the same effectiveness for this type of infection. The purpose of this study is to randomly assign patients with blood infection caused by Enterobacter or related bacteria to either meropenem or piperacillin/tazobactam in order to test whether these antibiotics have similar effectiveness.
No randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yet been performed comparing different treatment options for AmpC or ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae. During the last 10 years we have seen an exponentially increasing rate of carbapenem resistance worldwide, including Australia and New Zealand. The investigators urgently need data from well-designed RCTs to guide clinicians in the treatment of antibiotic resistant Gram-negative infections. The investigators face a situation where a commonly used antibiotic for these infections (meropenem) may be driving carbapenem resistance. For this reason, the investigators are seeking to compare a carbapenem-sparing regimen with a carbapenem for the treatment of these infections. Formal evaluation of safety and efficacy of generic antibiotics in the treatment of infection is of immense clinical and public health importance, and no formal trial has yet been conducted to address these issues. The international collaboration between teams of clinician researchers, some of whom are leaders in their field, makes it highly likely that the outcomes of this trial will have a significant impact on clinical practice. The investigators' hypothesis is that piperacillin/tazobactam (a carbapenem-sparing regimen) is non-inferior to meropenem (a widely used carbapenem) for the definitive treatment of bloodstream infections due to third-generation cephalosporin non-susceptible E. coli or Klebsiella species.
The purpose of this research study is to evaluate the effects (good and bad) of supplementation with Glutamine to that of a placebo (L-alanine), on your child and their Short Bowel Syndrome. Researchers are doing this study to see if the addition of Glutamine to oral/tube feeding (nutrition therapy) will work better by preventing bloodstream infections, improving growth, and/or changing the make-up of bacteria in your child's intestine. Glutamine is approved by the FDA for use in adults with Short Bowel Syndrome. In this study, the investigators will be assessing how well Glutamine affects Short Bowel Syndrome in children.