Effects of screening strategies to detect carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria: A systematic review

Ceftazidime/avibactam versus polymyxin B in carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infections: a propensity score-matched multicenter real-world study

OBJECTIVES

In this retrospective observational multicenter study, we aimed to assess efficacy and mortality between ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ/AVI) or polymyxin B (PMB)-based regimens for the treatment of Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) infections, as well as identify potential risk factors.

METHODS

A total of 276 CRKP-infected patients were enrolled in our study. Binary logistic and Cox regression analysis with a propensity score-matched (PSM) model were performed to identify risk factors for efficacy and mortality.

RESULTS

The patient cohort was divided into PMB-based regimen group (n = 98, 35.5%) and CAZ/AVI-based regimen group (n = 178, 64.5%). Compared to the PMB group, the CAZ/AVI group exhibited significantly higher rates of clinical efficacy (71.3% vs. 56.1%; p = 0.011), microbiological clearance (74.7% vs. 41.4%; p < 0.001), and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) (13.5% vs. 33.7%; p < 0.001). Binary logistic regression revealed that the treatment duration independently influenced both clinical efficacy and microbiological clearance. Vasoactive drugs, sepsis/septic shock, APACHE II score, and treatment duration were identified as risk factors associated with 30-day all-cause mortality. The CAZ/AVI-based regimen was an independent factor for good clinical efficacy, microbiological clearance, and lower AKI incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with CRKP infection, the CAZ/AVI-based regimen was superior to the PMB-based regimen.

Carriage of multidrug-resistant carbapenemase-producing gram-negative bacteria in patients admitted to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde hospitals: Implications for treatment

BACKGROUND

Infections caused by gram-negative carbapenemase-producing organisms (CPO) have become a global phenomenon. Screening of patients for CPO that was carried out at 48-h intervals enables early detection of carriers for infection control purposes and planning therapy.

METHODS

We investigated the bacterial flora detected on screening, the enzymes that conferred resistance and the proportion of patients who developed bacteraemia with CPO and their therapy.

RESULTS

In all, 27 patients had a positive screen for CPO. A small but significant (7.5%) proportion of patients were not detected on initial screening. Escherichia coli and Klebsiella were predominant. New-Delhi metallo β-lactamase and oxacillin carbapenemases were the main enzymatic mechanisms of resistance. Four (14.8%) patients developed bacteraemia with CPO (30- and 90-day survival 100% and 75%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A single negative screen does not rule out colonisation. A significant proportion of patients colonised with CPO develop bacteraemia. Vigilance is needed to prevent the nosocomial spread of CPO.

Effectiveness of tailored screening for multidrug-resistant organisms upon admission to an intensive care unit in the United Arab Emirates

BACKGROUND

Multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) screening may identify high-risk patients for MDRO infection and curb the spread of these resistant pathogens. However, the heterogeneous practices in MDRO screening and the diversity of MDRO risk factors necessitate a tailored approach for successful implementation. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of tailored MDRO screening in predicting MDRO carriage compared to universal screening.

METHODS

Critically ill patients who underwent MDRO screening tests upon intensive care unit admission between September 2015 and December 2019 were included in the study. A risk-predicting model was developed using risk factors identified through multivariable logistic regression analysis. If an individual had one or more identified risk factors, the individual was deemed to be at risk of MDRO carriage and undergo tailored screening. The sensitivity of tailored screening was compared with universal screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales).

RESULTS

The use of tracheostomy or endotracheal tubes, previous antibiotic exposure, previous multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli carriage history, admission to the medical department, peripheral vascular disease, and liver disease were associated with positive screening for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli. These six risk factors accounted for all positive screening for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli, requiring 38.6% of all tests. Notably, MRSA had different risk factor profiles, and the risk factor-based screening approach detected only 43.1% (31 out of 72) of MRSA-positive cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored screening based on identified risk factors showed variable sensitivities to individual MDROs compared to universal screening. A tailored screening approach for individual MDROs may enhance the overall effectiveness of MDRO screening programs.

Infection control measures against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria in children and neonates

The increase in infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units over recent years is alarming. MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii have constituted the main causes of the MDR Gram-negative bacteria problem. The implementation of infection control measures such as hand hygiene, cohorting of patients, contact precautions, active surveillance and environmental cleaning could diminish their spread. Recently, water safety has been identified as a major component of infection control policies. The aim of the current review is to highlight the effectiveness of these infection control measures in managing outbreaks caused by MDR Gram-negative bacteria in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units and highlight future perspectives on the topic.

Outbreak investigations after identifying carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) are a serious cause of healthcare-associated infections. Part of the infection prevention and control measures are outbreak investigations (OI) of patients, healthcare workers (HCW), and the environment after identifying a CRPA in order to identify carriers and environmental reservoirs, so that targeted actions can be taken to prevent further transmission. However, little is known on when and how to perform such OI. Therefore, this systematic review aims to summarize OI performed after detection of CRPA in the endemic and epidemic hospital setting.

MAIN TEXT

Articles related to our research question were identified through a literature research in multiple databases (Embase, Medline Ovid, Cochrane, Scopus, Cinahl, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) until January 12, 2022 (Prospero registration number CRD42020194165). Hundred-twenty-six studies were included. In both the endemic and the epidemic setting, a median number of two out of seven predefined components of OI were identified. In the endemic setting, the most frequent component of OI was screening of the environment (28 studies, 62.2%). In the epidemic setting, screening of the environment (72 studies, 88.9%), and screening of patients during hospitalization (30 studies, 37%) were most frequently performed. Only 19 out of 126 studies (15.1%) reported screening of contact patients, and 37 studies reported screening of healthcare workers (HCW, 29.4%).

CONCLUSION

Due to probable underreporting of OI in the literature, the available evidence for the usefulness of the individual components of OI is scarce. This could lead to inhomogeneous performance of OI after detection of CRPA in the healthcare setting, and with this, potential under- or overscreening. While we could show evidence for the usefulness for environmental screening in order to identify the mode of transmission, evidence for HCW screening is scarce and might not lead to the identification of modes of transmission. Further studies are needed to better understand CI in different settings and, finally, develop guidance on when and how to best perform OI.