Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 89565

AbstractCase ReportDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Case report
Year : 2023 | Month : May | Volume : 17 | Issue : 5 | Page : OR01 - OR04 Full Version

Post COVID-19 Infection with Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteraemia: A Case Series


Published: May 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/61840.17962
Meruva Karthik, Alekhya Abburu, Kainat Aftab

1. Assistant Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Kamineni Academy of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 2. Postgraduate Intern, Department of Internal Medicine, Kamineni Academy of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 3. Postgraduate Intern, Department of Internal Medicine, Kamineni Academy of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

Correspondence Address :
Alekhya Abburu,
11-13-770, Plot# 29, Green Hills Colony, Kothapet, Hyderabad-500035, Telangana, India.
E-mail: dralekhya97@gmail.com

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is a leading bacterial pathogen that causes deadly infections such as bacteraemia, Toxic Shock Syndrome (TSS), and endocarditis. It has been the main contributor to secondary bacterial infections during viral pandemics, greatly raising patient morbidity and fatality rates. It is unknown how this secondary bacteraemia would affect people who have Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Herein, the authors present a series of case studies of 8 patients (4 males and 4 females) infected with Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) at a tertiary hospital in Hyderabad, India, who eventually developed S. aureus bacteraemia with widespread seeding of secondary infections including cellulitis and abscess formation. Adult patients aged 20-60 years of age who were infected with COVID-19 from June 2022 to August 2022 and had positive bacterial cultures for S. aureus during admission were included in the study. A total of eight patients hospitalised for COVID-19 with secondary bacteraemia were identified. Of these patients admitted with severe limb infections, three patients expired after a week of ongoing treatment from their blood cultures. Multivariate analysis identified the onset of bacteraemia (>4 days from the date of admission) and age as significant predictors of mortality in admitted patients. Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) scoring and blood cultures were used to identify the mortality risk with a p-value of 0.05 statistical significance. The patients were subsequently treated with antibiotics and given conservative management. Some of the patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) who had critical co-morbidities expired within a week of ongoing treatment. The final outcome of the present case series was that bacteraemia caused by S. aureus is associated with a high mortality rate in COVID-19 patients. More research is needed to understand the relationship between COVID-19 and secondary S. aureus bacteraemia.

Keywords

Coronavirus disease-2019, Severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2, Systemic inflammatory response syndrome

Staphylococcus aureus has been previously described as the primary causative pathogen of secondary bacterial infections. Bacteria-related complications, in particular, are now being documented as a result of bacterial infection (1). According to Chertow DS et al., onset of secondary bacterial infections with influenza is typically seen within the first six days of influenza infection, when viral shedding is the highest. Bacterial pneumonia in post-influenza patients has been frequently studied and is likely facilitated by complex interactions between viruses and the host immune system and disruption of the mucosal barrier within the respiratory tract (2). The global pandemic COVID-19 has been brought on by the rapid spread of the coronavirus 2 associated with SARS-CoV-2 (3). Infection with COVID-19 can cause serious sequelae such as Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), thromboembolic events, septic shock, and multi-organ failure in addition to rapid spread through high transmission rates [4,5]. According to one study, the prevalence of bacteraemia ranged from 1.6% to 3.8%, with S. aureus being responsible for 13.3% of cases (6). In COVID-19 patients, bacterial co-infection may worsen the immunocompromised state brought on by the virus, further deteriorating the clinical prognosis (7). It is uncertain how secondary S. aureus bacteraemia affects SARS-CoV-2 infection-related mortality in patients. As will be covered in the present case series, the broad seeding of secondary bacterial infections in a post-COVID-19 patient is potentially impacted by the multi-organ spread of COVID-19. (Table/Fig 1) demonstrates the baseline laboratory values.

Case Report

The present case series includes eight patients who were infected with COVID-19 and presented with various skin infections. The cases were diagnosed based on the blood cultures obtained during admission; it was found that most of the skin infections were caused due to Staphylococcus species of bacteraemia and showed very high mortality rates in persons affected with COVID-19. Blood cultures were obtained from the susceptible patients and were tested for the presence of specific organisms. Phenotypic tests were the mainstay in the diagnosis of staphylococcal infections, in which coagulase tests are usually confirmatory for S. aureus. Coagulase testing is performed using Slide Coagulase Test (SCT) or Tube Coagulase Test (TCT). Screening for S. aureus was based on growth on Mannitol Salt Agar (MSA)/DNase test, and confirmation was done with TCT. The inoculum from a pure culture is transferred to a sterile tube of phenol red mannitol broth and is incubated at 35-37ºC for 24 hours, the results were determined with the positive test change of colour from red to yellow, indicating a pH change and confirming the presence of Staphylococcus bacteria. One of the most common factors found in each patient admitted was the history of SARS-CoV2 infection.

A total of eight patients were hospitalised with COVID-19 from June 2022 to August 2022, were identified to have S. aureus bacteraemia. These patients were found to be having a past history of severe COVID-19 pneumonia and were kept on mechanical ventilators until they recovered completely. Overall baseline characteristics with laboratory values and clinical manifestations along with intervened therapies were displayed in the (Table/Fig 2). The mean age was 51±3 years, and 4 (50%) were males. The Body Mass Index (BMI) was 27.9 (23.8-33.0) median inflammatory baseline markers, including C-reactive protein, D-dimer; procalcitonin levels were elevated at baseline. quick Systemic Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score was calculated in order to diagnose sepsis in patients and to assess them according to the level of infection. Out of eight patients admitted, 5 (62.5%) had S. aureus bacteraemia susceptible to Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and the rest 3 (37.5%) had S. aureus bacteraemia susceptible to Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). There were no significant differences in outcomes and characteristics between bacteraemia caused by MSSA and MRSA. Of all the eight patients with known source of bacteraemia, the most common source of entry was skin and vascular structures. The sources of entry of bacteria were confirmed based on the symptoms and physical exam findings of the patients. 2 (25%) patients with portal of entry as skin had no (+) blood cultures at admission and none of the two survived, whereas, patients with hospital onset bacteraemia had been discharged after prompt treatment and had no risk of mortality. Hence, the risk of mortality was assessed based on the time of admission to number of hospital day and the age of the patients. The median time from admission to bacteraemia onset was 8 days. The most common antimicrobial regimen used was vancomycin and cefazolin. Definitive antibiotic regimen given for patients with MRSA bacteraemia was vancomycin and linezolid, whereas, patients with MSSA bacteraemia were given antibiotic coverage of beta lactums such as cefazolin or ceftriaxone for 10-14 days.

Median WBC counts and procalcitonin at the time of blood cultures were elevated from admission, with a mean temperature of 38.0°C±0.98°C. The median PITT bacteraemia score (IQR) was elevated at 5.0 (2.0-7.0) which were found to be higher in 7 out of 8 (87.5%) patients who had 7 day mortality compared to 3 out of 8 (37.5%) patients, who survived the risk as discussed in (Table/Fig 3).

Discussion

There were 14 different cases of bacteraemia in patients admitted with COVID-19, out of which 8 cases were identified as infections caused by S. aureus type of bacteria. Of all the cases of bacteraemia reported, those with S. aureus had high mortality rates. Ever since the COVID-19 has evolved, a lot of related co-morbidities have been identified in infected persons. The presence of bacterial and/or fungal secondary infection or co-infection is likely another important factor affecting mortality and it has received inadequate attention. S. aureus infections are a known complication of other viral pandemics, such as the Spanish flu in 1918-1919 and the H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009-2010 (8). In all influenza seasons, S. aureus is known to function synergistically, causing an increase in illness severity and mortality (9). The most common cause of mortality seen with S. aureus bacteraemia are those of hospital acquired or nosocomial infections (10). Cusumano JA et al., reported that only 1.6% (42/2679) of patients who were admitted to a COVID-19 facility had S. aureus bacteraemia, although, these patients had a significant death rate (11). From the initial positive blood culture, the hospital death rate was 54.8% after 14 days and 66.7% after 30 days. These figures are significantly higher than the published fatality rates for COVID-19 hospitalised patients (12). Bacterial co-infection affects less than 0.5% of young, healthy people and atleast 2.5% of people over the age of 65 who are infected with flu (2). In a recent study by Lansbury L et al., it was discovered that patients with COVID-19 have been reported to develop bacterial infections. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 30 studies, of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 identified that out of 3834 patients, 7% had bacterial co-infections (13).

According to Sepulveda J et al., as of March 31, 1.6% of COVID-19 patients developed bacteraemia, with S. aureus accounting for 13%, among these cases as the second most frequent pathogen (6). Similar data were reported by Nori P et al., who found that, S. aureus was the most common cause of bacteraemia in 1.9% of COVID-19 patients, accounting for 44% of bacteraemia (14). The timing of bacteraemia in COVID-19 infection or its relationship to death was not evaluated in any of these trials. SARS-CoV-2 has primarily been demonstrated to replicate in the respiratory system, autopsy samples have also revealed the presence of SARS-CoV-2 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) in the kidneys, liver, heart, brain, and blood, revealing multiorgan involvement (15). The present study series of cases where, patients had multiorgan system involvement and associated co-morbidities. Additionally, COVID-19 has frequently been linked to endothelial cell dysfunction, which is a significant factor in restricting bacterial spread during the systemic inflammatory response brought on by bacteraemia (16). Studies involving only Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients indicate a 14% risk of bacteraemia in COVID-19 patients (17). This low risk of hospital-acquired super infections in comparison to other viral infections could be attributed to empiric antibiotic use, isolation measures, or host macrophage activation. As mentioned in the above case series of the present article, patients who were admitted in ICU with associated co-morbidities and didn’t receive empiric treatment had high risk of bacteraemia. Patients readmitted in the hospital due to bacterial infections had severe COVID-19 infection in the past and were kept on mechanical ventilators. This was once proved by Mormeneo Bayo S et al., that super infections can be associated with ICU admissions, especially with the use of mechanical ventilation and catheters (18). The aetiology of bacteraemia differs between COVID-19 positive and non COVID-19 patients, with COVID-19 patients typically presenting with pathogens associated with healthcare settings, such as coagulase negative Staphylococcus species and Candida. Non COVID-19 patients, on the other hand, are primarily affected by community-acquired pathogens as specified by Bhargava A et al., the majority of the bacteraemia cases associated with COVID-19 patients was discovered to be multidrug resistant (19). As seen in the case series, there were cases of MRSA associated infections as well, which signifies that patients can be infected even with multidrug resistant bacteraemia. This can be explained by the fact that the majority of cases were presented through nursing facilities, as indwelling catheters are commonly used in nursing homes. Residents of nursing facilities who did not use indwelling catheters had a lower prevalence than those who did (20). It has previously been noted that, bacteraemia that develops in the hospital is linked to higher mortality. Age was another factor, the authors found to be a predictor of 14 day hospital mortality (21). This was linked to associated co-morbidities in elderly patients who were admitted in ICU in the hospital who had risk of mortality than elderly who presented without co-morbidities like diabetes and hypertension. A score of less than two has been associated with a high risk of mortality for S. aureus, despite the PITT bacteraemia score’s original development as a method to predict gram-negative bacteraemia mortality as depicted by Chang FY et al., (22). In comparison to earlier S. aureus bacteraemia investigations, the median PITT bacteraemia score (IQR) of 5.0 (2.0-7.0) is higher. In contrast to one study, which found the mean PITT bacteraemia score to be 4, another study done by Hagg S et al., found that, the median PITT bacteraemia score (IQR) ranged from 0 to 2 (23). As shown in (Table/Fig 3), patients with highest PITT bacteraemia score (7.0) had increased risk of 14 day mortality as, this was previously described by Ioannidis JPA et al., in his study that patients with hospital-onset bacteraemia had greater median PITT bacteraemia scores, which most likely played a role in the link between hospital-onset bacteraemia and 14 day mortality (24). The mortality rate for patients co-infected with COVID-19 and S. aureus in the present series research was 61.7%, which shows a significantly higher mortality rate when compared to patients infected with COVID-19 alone (25).

Cusumano JA et al., depicted that, 76.5% of the patients in research had co-infections with COVID-19 and S. aureus after being admitted to the hospital, preventative actions in the community or treatment in an outpatient setting may be crucial factors in lowering mortality from healthcare associated S. aureus infection (11). A post COVID-19 follow-up protocol has to be implemented in every healthcare setting, instructing patients every possible way of acquiring infections even after treatment of COVID-19, it is a deadly virus and can stay in the body for latent period. There has to be a routine health check up for patients infected with COVID-19 to get a quarterly check up, in the same way, that is followed in case of diabetic patients with their HbA1c levels. As shown in this case series, patients with co-morbidities had a longer hospital stay and recovered slowly. The mortality risk was even higher in patients with associated co-morbidities. Future high quality clinical studies examining patient outcomes are warranted and of critical importance to further expand on the findings of the systematic reviews.

Conclusion

The importance of the present case series was to signify the risk of bacteraemia is higher in patients with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection than the patients without, and that S. aureus is the most common infected organism causing a wide variety of infections in immunosuppressed patients. Bacteraemia caused by S. aureus is associated with a high mortality rate in COVID-19 patients. More research is needed to comprehend the correlation between COVID-19 and secondary S. aureus bacteraemia.

References

1.
Tasher D, Stein M, Simões EAF, Shohat T, Bromberg M, Somekh E. Invasive bacterial infections in relation to influenza outbreaks, 2006-2010. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2011;53(12):1199-207. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Chertow DS, Memoli MJ. Bacterial coinfection in influenza. JAMA. 2013;309(3):275. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Guan W, Ni Z, Hu Y, Liang W, Ou C, He J, et al. Clinical characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020;382(18):1708-20. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Cascella L, Monaco F, Nocerino D, Infernuso A, Cascella V, Del Prato F, et al. AB1134 bibliometric network analysis on tocilizumab treatment for COVID-19 patients. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2022;81(Suppl 1):1684-84. [crossref]
5.
Richardson S, Hirsch JS, Narasimhan M, Crawford JM, McGinn T, Davidson KW, et al. Presenting characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes among 5700 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in the New York City area. JAMA. 2020;323(20):2052-59. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Sepulveda J, Westblade LF, Whittier S, Satlin MJ, Greendyke WG, Aaron JG, et al. Bacteraemia and blood culture utilization during COVID-19 surge in New York City. Carroll KC, editor. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2020;58(8):e00875-20. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Choudhury I, Han H, Manthani K, Gandhi S, Dabhi R. COVID-19 as a possible cause of functional exhaustion of CD4 and CD8 T-cells and persistent cause of methicillin-sensitive staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Cureus. 2020;12(7):e9000. [crossref]
8.
Taubenberger JK, Morens DM, Fauci AS. The next influenza pandemic. JAMA [Internet]. 2007 May 9 [cited 2019 Jul 28];297(18):2025. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2504708/. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Morris DE, Cleary DW, Clarke SC. Secondary bacterial infections associated with influenza pandemics. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2017;8:1041.[crossref][PubMed]
10.
Dupper AC, Sullivan MJ, Chacko KI, Mishkin A, Ciferri B, Kumaresh A, et al. Blurred molecular epidemiological lines between the two dominant methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus clones. Open Forum Infectious Diseases. 2019;6(9):ofz302. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Cusumano JA, Dupper AC, Malik Y, Gavioli EM, Banga J, Berbel Caban A, et al. Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in patients infected with COVID-19: A case series. Open Forum Infectious Diseases [Internet]. 2020;7(11):ofaa518. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/7/11/ofaa518/5975147. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, Fan G, Liu Y, Liu Z, et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: A retrospective cohort study. The Lancet. 2020;395(10229):1054-62. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Lansbury L, Lim B, Baskaran V, Lim WS. Co-infections in people with COVID- 19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Infection [Internet]. 2020;81(2):266-75. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC7255350/. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Nori P, Cowman K, Chen V, Bartash R, Szymczak W, Madaline T, et al. Bacterial and fungal coinfections in COVID-19 patients hospitalized during the New York City pandemic surge. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 2020;42(1):84-88. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Dhama K, Khan S, Tiwari R, Sircar S, Bhat S, Malik YS, et al. Coronavirus Disease 2019-COVID-19. Clinical Microbiol Rev [Internet]. 2020;33(4):e00028- 20. Available from: https://cmr.asm.org/content/33/4/e00028-20. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Joffre J, Hellman J, Ince C, Ait-Oufella H. Endothelial responses in sepsis. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2020;202(3):361-70. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Garcia-Vidal C, Sanjuan G, Moreno-García E, Puerta-Alcalde P, Garcia-Pouton N, Chumbita M, et al. Incidence of co-infections and superinfections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study. Clinical Microbiology and Infection [Internet]. 2020 Jul [cited 2020 Sep 12]. Available from: https://reader. elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii.
18.
Mormeneo Bayo S, Palacián Ruíz MP, Moreno Hijazo M, Villuendas Usón MC. Bacteraemia during COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary hospital in Spain. Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica [Internet]. 2021 Feb 11 [cited 2022 Mar 14]. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0213005X21000379. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Bhargava A, Riederer K, Sharma M, Fukushima EA, Johnson L, Saravolatz L. High rate of Multidrug-Resistant Organisms (MDROs) among COVID-19 patients presenting with bacteraemia upon hospital admission. American Journal of Infection Control. 2021;49(11):1441-42. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Wang JT, Hsu LY, Lauderdale TL, Fan WC, Wang FD. Comparison of outcomes among adult patients with nosocomial bacteraemia caused by methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus: A retrospective cohort study. Becker K, editor. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(12):e0144710. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Hill PC, Birch M, Chambers S, Drinkovic D, Ellis-Pegler RB, Everts R, et al. Prospective study of 424 cases of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: Determination of factors affecting incidence and mortality. Intern Med J. 2001;31(2):97-103. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Chang FY, MacDonald BB, Peacock JE, Musher DM, Triplett P, Mylotte JM, et al. A prospective multicenter study of staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Medicine. 2003;82(5):322-32. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Hägg S, Jylhävä J, Wang Y, Xu H, Metzner C, Annetorp M, et al. Age, frailty, and comorbidity as prognostic factors for short-term outcomes in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in geriatric care. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association [Internet]. 2020;21(11):1555-59.e2. Available from: https:// www.jamda.com/action/showPdf?pii=S1525-8610%2820%2930704-0. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Ioannidis JPA. Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2020;99(1):19-33F. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Adalbert JR, Varshney K, Tobin R, Pajaro R. Clinical outcomes in patients co- infected with COVID-19 and Staphylococcus aureus: A scoping review. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2021;21(1):985.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/61840.17962

Date of Submission: Nov 24, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Dec 05, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Mar 20, 2023
Date of Publishing: May 01, 2023

Author declaration :
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Nov 26, 2022
• Manual Googling: Feb 22, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Mar 18, 2023 (18%)

Etymology: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com