Active clinical trials for "Bacterial Infections"

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the drug concentrations of AzaSite compared to Vigamox in tears of healthy volunteers

Staphylococcus aureus is the most common bacteria responsible for skin, bone, and muscle infections. Recent studies from the United States have suggested that a type of this bacterium called methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA) has become dramatically more common, especially the community strain. However, Canadian data is still largely lacking. This study aims to determine the prevalence of community acquired (CA) MRSA among patients presenting with skin and soft tissue infections to the Urgent Care Center and Emergency Departments in London, Ontario. This will be determined by taking swabs at enrollment from patient's noses, throats, and sites of infection. Patients will be asked to complete a health questionnaire with the goal of identifying risk factors associated with CA-MRSA. Through follow-up swabs of participants' noses and throats at one and three months, the effects of treatment on patient's carrying MRSA will be determined. Results may be used to form guidelines for empirical S aureus treatment in the region, reducing possible morbidity and mortality from delayed or suboptimal treatment of CA-MRSA infections. Improved understanding of risk factors associated with MRSA infection in a Canadian setting, may also change the practice of physicians considering empiric antibiotic therapy for skin and soft tissue infections.

The purpose of this study is to assess the long-term safety of levofloxacin administered to children as therapy for acute bacterial infection.

The investigators retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of granulocyte transfusions as adjunctive treatment for severe infections in neutropenic fever unresponsive to antimicrobial therapy in hematological patients.

Some children get serious bacterial infections that require hospitalization and then a long course of antibiotics to completely treat the infection. Examples of these serious infections include ruptured appendicitis (when the appendix gets inflamed and bursts, releasing bacteria into the abdomen), complicated pneumonia (when an infected pocket of pus forms either in the lung or between the lung and chest wall), and osteomyelitis (an infection of the bone). To extend the duration of antibiotic therapy after discharge from the hospital, doctors will often insert a long catheter called a PICC line in the child's vein, which can stay in the body for several weeks. However, PICC lines require a fair amount of maintenance and training of caregivers in their use, require children to restrict their activities, and can lead to serious complications, such as blood stream infections and clots. An alternative to PICC lines is extending the duration of antibiotic therapy with oral antibiotics (pills or syrup) that achieve high levels of medicine in the blood and do not have the extra work, inconvenience and risks of PICC lines. Unfortunately, there are very few high quality studies that have demonstrated that oral antibiotics are just as good as intravenous antibiotics delivered via a PICC line, and so many doctors still recommend the PICC line treatment option. Also, no studies have been done to compare the impact of these two treatment options on the quality of life of the child and their caregivers. In this proposal the investigator outline a series of projects to compare oral antibiotics vs. intravenous antibiotics delivered via a PICC line in children who require prolonged (at least 1 week) home antibiotic therapy after hospitalization for three different serious bacterial infections: ruptured appendicitis, complicated pneumonia, and osteomyelitis. To see whether oral antibiotics are just as good as PICC lines, the investigators will use data collected from over 15,000 children with one of these three infections who were hospitalized at one of 43 US children's hospitals during the years 2009-2011, and determine whether PICC lines resulted in fewer rehospitalizations for treatment failure than oral therapy.

Low-dose aspirin (ASA) has emerged as the most important cause of peptic ulcer bleeding worldwide. In western countries, ASA has overtaken non steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as a major cause of peptic ulcer bleeding in the elderly population [1,2]. Management of peptic ulcer bleeding in patients receiving ASA for cardiothrombotic diseases is a clinical dilemma. In a randomized trial of continuous versus interrupted ASA therapy after endoscopic treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding, patients who discontinued ASA had a 10-fold increased incidence of all-cause mortality compared to those who received continuous ASA therapy. On the other hand, patients receiving continuous ASA therapy had a two-fold increased risk of early rebleeding [3]. Thus, preventing the occurrence of peptic ulcer bleeding in ASA users is important in reducing morbidity and mortality. Given the uncertain clinical utility of Helicobacter Pylori (Hp) testing in ASA users, this prospective cohort study aims to determine whether testing for Hp will have any impact on the long-term incidence of ulcer bleeding in ASA users with high ulcer risk. The investigators hypothesize that among ASA users with Hp infection and ulcer bleeding, the long-term incidence of recurrent ulcer bleeding with ASA use will be low after eradication of Hp alone.

Assess efficacy of piperacillin/tazobactam in reducing the cases of colonization and infection of bacteria.

This randomized phase III trial studies chlorhexidine gluconate cleansing to see how well it works compared to control cleansing in preventing central line associated bloodstream infection and acquisition of multi-drug resistant organisms in younger patients with cancer or undergoing donor stem cell transplant. Chlorhexidine gluconate may help reduce bloodstream infections and bacterial infections associated with the central line.

The objective of this human randomized, double blind, placebo-control (RDBPC) study is to evaluate the efficacy of a 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) gel on reducing bacterial load and peri-implant inflammation at implant-abutment interface during the early healing stage.Thirty-six healthy patients (mean age 52,28 years; range 29-75 years) without a significant past medical anamnesis, all non-smokers, will be recruited as candidates for single implant placement and prosthetic rehabilitation.Patients will be randomly divided in group A (control) and group B (test) as indicated by the randomization chart. All Implants (Cortex classic, Shalomi, Israel)would be inserted by two skilled operators who followed a two-stage protocol and placed them according to the manufacturer's instructions.Eventually, all patients will be rehabilitated with a single implant-supported crown. During all the stages either a gel containing 0.20% CHX (Plak ®Gel; Polifarma Wellness Srl, Rome, Italy) or a placebo gel (Placebo, Polifarma Wellness Srl, Rome, Italy) will be used. The two gels are perfectly alike in packaging, color and smell and nobody knew the exact location of placebo or test gel, which will be revealed, only after data collection would be performed, by the person who prepared them. A or B gel will be placed on the internal connection abutments and then a cover screw would be inserted. Finally, the site would be sutured with non-absorbable nylon sutures. Cone Beam Computed Tomography evaluation (CBCT) (VatechIpax 3D PCH-6500, Fort Lee, NJ USA) would be performed both for pre-operative and post-surgical implant placement. Both gels will be given to the patients, according to the protocol, and applied 2 times/day until suture removal after 7 days. Soft tissue biopsies would be performed by means of a circular scalpel (5.5 mm in diameter) at the implant insertion (T0) and after two months of healing (second stage surgery)(T1) to analyze the peri-implant inflammatory infiltrate and the micro-vessel density (MVD) in both groups. All the radiographs taken during the study time points would be analysed to measure the bone resorption after 1 year or on other studt time points.

In recent years, there has been an increasing prevalence of bacterial infections caused by multiresistant and extremely resistant organisms in patients with cirrhosis. These infections are associated with a worse prognosis, generate difficulties in the management of the patient during hospitalization and increase health costs. The main objective of this project is to estimate the prevalence of infections by multiresistant bacteria in patients with cirrhosis. Additionally, the prevalence of other antibiotic resistance patterns and morbi-mortality in the study population will be evaluated. For these purposes, a multicenter prospective cohort study will be carried out, including patients with cirrhosis who present bacterial infections at the time of admission, or during hospitalization. Performing a study in Argentina on the clinical and microbiological characteristics of bacterial infections in patients with cirrhosis could be very useful to develop new strategies for prevention and treatment of this severe complication.