1/6 At yesterday's Emory IM COVID #JournalClub, I presented a great article ( @SHEA_Epi) on bacterial/fungal co-infection among COVID patients - from the Bronx at the height of the pandemic!

Here are some 🔦 highlights 🔦 from the study by Nori et al. #MedTwitter #tweetorial
2/6 First, it looked at all #COVID patients Mar 1-Apr 18, which was ~ the pandemic zenith in NYC. (Visual aid from @COVID19Tracking via @TheAtlantic). Total (+) by PCR? 4,267.
3/6 Then, they did a retrospective chart review. Total patients with (+) respiratory or bloodstream cultures? 152.

For those crunching the numbers, that's just 3.6%!
4/6 And that 3.6% was pretty sick:
🌡️ 95% 🫁 cultures = ICU
🌡️ 54% of 🩸cultures = CVCs, HD catheters, etc.
🌡️ 8 candidemia (7/8 = #CLABSI)

CRP & Procal were not helpful in distinguishing [COVID] from [COVID+co-infection]. Ex.🩸IQR was 0-37 CRP, 0-10 procal.
5/6 Most also seemed to develop those infections after arrival: median time-to-(+) 7d for 🩸 and 6d for 🫁. A lot of co-infections were in immunocompromised (55%).

Yet 71% of ALL COVID(+) patients in the study got antibiotics. ?💊? As the authors say, "a significant mismatch."
6/6 So what should we take away?

🔦 Bacterial/fungal co-infection is rare (3.6%) in COVID
🔦 Look for it in the very sick (tubes/lines) who are already admitted
🔦 Don't forget candida 🍄
🔦 Don't rely on CXR, CRP, or Procal
🔦 Be judicious with antibiotics!
Bonus/ Check out the isolate breakdown (155 from 🩸 / 112 from 🫁).
You can follow @the_matelski.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.