Predictive value of surveillance cultures for bacteremia caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales among patients with hematological diseases

Antibiotic practice and stewardship in the management of neutropenic fever: a survey of US institutions

OBJECTIVE

To describe neutropenic fever management practices among healthcare institutions.

DESIGN

Survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network (SRN) representing healthcare institutions within the United States.

METHODS

An electronic survey was distributed to SRN representatives, with questions pertaining to demographics, antimicrobial prophylaxis, supportive care, and neutropenic fever management. The survey was distributed from fall 2022 through spring 2023.

RESULTS

40 complete responses were recorded (54.8% response rate), with respondent institutions accounting for approximately 15.7% of 2021 US hematologic malignancy hospitalizations and 14.9% of 2020 US bone marrow transplantations. Most entities have institutional guidelines for neutropenic fever management (35, 87.5%) and prophylaxis (31, 77.5%), and first-line treatment included IV antipseudomonal antibiotics (35, 87.5% cephalosporin; 5, 12.5% penicillin; 0, 0% carbapenem).We observed significant heterogeneity in treatment course decisions, with roughly half (18, 45.0%) of respondents continuing antibiotics until neutrophil recovery, while the remainder having criteria for de-escalation prior to neutrophil recovery. Respondents were more willing to de-escalate prior to neutrophil recovery in patients with identified clinical (27, 67.5% with pneumonia) or microbiological (30, 75.0% with bacteremia) sources after dedicated treatment courses.

CONCLUSIONS

We found substantial variation in the practice of de-escalation of empiric antibiotics relative to neutrophil recovery, highlighting a need for more robust evidence for and adoption of this practice. No respondents use carbapenems as first-line therapy, comparing favorably to prior survey studies conducted in other countries.

Screening for multidrug-resistant organisms in high-risk hospitalized patients with hematologic diseases

OBJECTIVES

Patients treated for hematologic malignancies are at higher risk for blood stream infections (BSI) and multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) are increasingly involved. Studies showed a significant association between rectal colonization status and a higher risk of subsequent MDRO BSI. The objective of our study was to probe the practice of surveillance cultures in Belgian hematology centers.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to the 13 hematology centers participating in the acute leukemia board of the Belgian Hematology Society. 21 questions probed for the method of surveillance cultures, MDRO screened, antimicrobial prophylaxis, and empirical therapy and their relationship with colonization status.

RESULTS

All centers completed the questionnaire in full. Routine gastrointestinal surveillance cultures in hematologic patients are taken in 10 hospitals. Organisms tested for included mostly ESBL (n = 9) and carbapenem-resistant (n = 8) Enterobacterales. All centers with a screening strategy adapt empiric antibiotic therapy based on MDRO colonization. Prophylaxis strategies are variable, only two centers adapt prophylaxis upon documentation of fluoroquinolone resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of the Belgian centers perform routine surveillance cultures and adapt empiric therapy for neutropenic fever accordingly. Other reasons for testing include to gain insight into local epidemiology and to prevent in-hospital transmission. In general, there was significant variability in surveillance dimensions.