View clinical trials related to Sepsis Bacterial.
Filter by:CRAB infections in ICUs are on the rise, leading to higher morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs due to resistance to most antibiotics, including carbapenems. The main resistance mechanisms include carbapenemases, efflux pumps, and changes in the bacterial cell wall. Current treatments include polymyxins (Colistin, Polymyxin B), which are effective but can lead to resistance, aminoglycosides (Amikacin, Gentamicin), which are limited by resistance, and tetracyclines (Tigecycline, Eravacycline), which are effective against CRAB. Fosfomycin is effective in combination treatments, and combination therapy (e.g., colistin with sulbactam, fosfomycin, or eravacycline) can enhance outcomes. Previous research shows promise for combination therapies, improving treatment efficacy and reducing mortality. New regimens are being studied to find optimal combinations. Individualized dosing is crucial, considering patient-specific factors like age, weight, and renal function. Adjustments depend on the infection site and comorbidities. Strict infection control and antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are essential. ASPs focus on optimizing antibiotic use and reducing resistance through education and surveillance. Future directions include continued research for new drugs or combinations and strategies to overcome resistance and improve treatment efficacy. Study goals include achieving negative samples after 10 days of therapy, 30-day survival, discharge rates, reduced SOFA scores, and improved clinical and radiological findings. A randomized study will compare colistin combined with fosfomycin, ampicillin/sulbactam, and eravacycline. In summary, treating CRAB infections is complex, requiring combination therapy, individualized dosing, and strict infection control measures.
Bacterial blood stream infections are common and life-threatening. Bloodstream infections have historically been identified using blood cultures, which often take 24-72 hours to result and are imperfectly sensitive. Early administration of antimicrobial therapy is a fundamental component of the management of adults presenting to the hospital with a suspected bloodstream infection and/or sepsis. But because blood cultures frequently take 24-72 hours to result, patients are typically treated with empiric, broad spectrum antibiotics. In a meta-analysis of sepsis studies, empirical antibiotic therapy was inappropriate for the organism that ultimately grew in culture in almost half of patients. Thus, patients are commonly exposed to unnecessary antibiotics without evidence of infection or with evidence of infection requiring narrow antibiotic selection. For example, current guidelines recommend the use of empiric intravenous vancomycin as coverage for a bloodstream infection caused by the bacterial pathogen methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Vancomycin requires careful monitoring due to its narrow therapeutic range and high risk of toxicity. Administration of vancomycin to patients who do not have MRSA can lead to avoidable adverse drug events and costs, as well as drive antimicrobial resistance. There has been increasing interest in using rapid diagnostic tests that identify bacteria directly from whole blood samples without relying on growth in culture, referred to as "direct-from-blood" tests, to guide early therapeutic management of patients with suspected bloodstream infections in addition to standard blood cultures. One such FDA-approved, direct-from-blood test is the T2Bacteria® Panel. This panel's performance as a direct-from blood test for bacterial pathogens has been described in previous studies. A recent meta-analysis of largely observational studies reported a faster transition to targeted microbial therapy and de-escalation of empirical microbial therapy, as well as a shorter duration of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay for patients who received this direct-from-blood test. We will conduct a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial examining the effect of using the T2Bacteria® Panel direct from-blood testing, compared to using blood cultures alone (standard of care), on antimicrobial receipt and clinical outcomes for adults presenting to the hospital with suspected infection and who have been initiated on empiric therapy with intravenous vancomycin.
Babies and children have an increased risk of getting an infection with a bacteria in the bloodstream (sepsis). It is often difficult for the doctor to determine whether a child has an infection of the bloodstream, because the symptoms are often unclear and can also occur in children who are not sick. To determine whether there is an infection, a little blood is currently taken for a blood test (the blood culture) to investigate whether there is a bacteria in the blood. However, it often takes at least 36 hours before the results of this blood culture are available. That is why antibiotics are usually started immediately to treat the possible infection. However, it often turns out that the blood culture is negative after 36 hours, which means that no bacteria have been found in the blood. Usually the antibiotics are then stopped because it turns out that there was no infection at all. There is currently no good test that can predict whether (newborn) children have an infection or not. That is why too many children are currently wrongly receiving antibiotics. These antibiotics can damage the healthy bacteria in the intestines. There are many billions of 'beneficial bacteria' in the intestine. These play an important role in the digestion of food and protect against external infections. Antibiotics aim to kill bacteria that cause inflammation or infection. Unfortunately, antibiotics also kill some of these beneficial bacteria. In addition, unnecessary use of antibiotics contributes to antibiotic resistance. The aim of this research is to investigate whether Molecular Culture, a PCR based test that can identify bacterial pathogens in bodily fluids within 4 hours, has greater accuracy than traditional culturing techniques for bacteria in blood. If proven, this could lead to faster identification or exclusion of sepsis in children.
A case report of a patient with intellectual disability and neurogenic bladder complicated with sepsis
Abionic has developed a targeted, rapid test for pancreatic stone protein (PSP) in human K2-EDTA venous whole blood using the abioSCOPE instrument. Currently no PSP study comparaison has been done between venous and arterial whole blood. Abionic would like to confirm the equivalence of the PSP between venous whole blood and arterial whole blood.
Having bacteria in the blood can be very dangerous. This is called bacteraemia (or bacteremia) or bloodstream infection. It can lead to problems across the whole body, which is what happens in sepsis. Bacteria called Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) cause one kind of bacteraemia. Up to a third of people with this condition die within three months, even with antibiotics. One reason for such severe problems is that the bacteria can spread almost anywhere in the body, and hide in places where they are very hard to find. When people with S. aureus bacteraemia come into hospital and have had antibiotics, doctors sometimes cannot tell if they still have an infection source (called a 'focus') hiding in their body. The focus can be like an abscess and may need removing or the pus draining out. A focus might be obvious, if there is pain or swelling, or it might be hidden and deep. If these 'foci' can be found, then doctors can treat them and this helps to cure patients. To improve survival for patients with these life-threatening infections, it is vital that doctors find the focus of S. aureus bacteraemia as quickly as possible. However, the research team do not know the best way to do this. Most patients with S. aureus bacteraemia have a chest X-ray and a scan of the heart valves. Patients may go to the scanning department lots of times while doctors try to work out where these foci are. This is uncomfortable and takes a lot of time. In about 1 in 5 cases the doctors still cannot find the focus. This is very worrying for patients, their relatives and doctors. This study has been designed by researchers, doctors and patient advocates. It aims to work out if fewer patients may die when a specific type of scan called a 'PET/CT' is done quickly, because it finds more foci. To do this the team plan to do a clinical trial in patients with S. aureus bacteraemia. Half of the patients will receive the usual tests that patients currently get and the other half will receive an extra scan as soon as possible. The patients will be chosen randomly (like the flip of a coin) to go into one of the 2 groups. A year into the trial, an independent committee will check the results to make sure the extra scan is finding more foci. If this is the case, the trial will carry on. At the end of the study, we will share the results globally. The findings are expected to change the way this dangerous condition is managed, so patients do better.
The study aims to evaluate the suitability of the SOFA score implemented by the Sepsis 3 guideline to detect sepsis in patients suffering from subrarachnoid hemorrhage.
This is a single-center prospective bio-specimen analysis and observational study aiming to define immune pathways disrupted in bacterial sepsis and to identify clinically useful biomarkers of immune status.
The overall purpose of this study is to demonstrate the usability of a clinical-grade device in the form of a finger clasp similar to a pulse oximeter for monitoring lactate values, by comparing its performance in reading interstitial fluid lactate values against a known clinical standard in the form of venous lactate levels. Serum lactate measurements are used clinically as a measure of end-organ dysfunction and physiologic stress. Changes in lactate may indicate worsening infection in the setting of sepsis, drug toxicity for certain xenobiotics, or exercise tolerance in exercise physiology. Serum lactate cutoffs have been developed for various disease states and trigger a variety of medical decisions directed at managing the course of the disease. A common theme in the application of lactate measurements to understanding changes in physiology is the need to obtain venous blood to determine lactate. While point-of-care assays have been developed that improve the processing speed, there continues to be a need to obtain fingerstick blood or in most cases, venous blood. Obtaining venous blood for serum lactate requires an individual with phlebotomy skills, the processing capabilities of a laboratory to determine lactate concentrations, or the availability of point of care technology. An alternative method to measure lactate is to sample interstitial fluid which surrounds cells and tissues in the body. Obtaining interstitial fluid is potentially less invasive without the need for repeat phlebotomy or the presence of an indwelling intravenous catheter which can become complicated by infection. The analysis of interstitial fluid for glucose has been validated and is clinically utilized in continuous glucose monitors in individuals with diabetes. In this investigation, the investigators will utilize a novel device, the Lab Clasp to obtain interstitial fluid in a noninvasive method. The Lab Clasp is manufactured to resemble a finger pulse oximeter with additional onboard microfluidics channels that obtain a lactate concentration from interstitial fluid. This streamlined process of obtaining the point of care lactate measurements on demand allows for tasks like serial lactate measurements to be accomplished on a reliable schedule with less workload for nursing staff typically required to draw venous blood. Additionally, the portable and noninvasive nature of the Lab Clasp system may render it usable in facilities that lack skilled staff necessary to perform phlebotomy.
Despite access to experimental Ebola Virus Disease (EVD)-specific treatments, about 30% of patients still die in the Ebola Treatment Centers (ETC) in DRC. There is limited study done about the potential contribution of bacterial co-infections (in particular bloodstream infections) to this adverse outcome, as blood cultures were so far rarely available in epidemic areas. Findings from patients treated in Europe and the USA, and case discussions in the field call for further investigation. Building further on an ongoing microbiological surveillance project of ITM and INRB in DRC, we are able to set up a research project which will pilot in a standardized manner clinical bacteriology tools (bacterial blood cultures, biomarkers as CRP, procalcitonin and white blood cell differential count, and clinical early warning scores) to study bacterial bloodstream infection in EVD patients in the N-Kivu/Ituri outbreak. This project will add evidence on 1) frequency, causative pathogen and antibiotic resistance profiles of bacterial bloodstream infections, as well as 2) the predictive value of biomarkers and early warning scores, in EVD patients at different timepoints during hospitalization in an ETC in DRC. The results will inform appropriate antibiotic treatment in an EVD setting and improve patient outcomes.