Meningococcal disease deaths and the frequency of antibiotic administration delays

Impact of pre-hospital antibiotic therapy on mortality in invasive meningococcal disease: a propensity score study

The role of pre-hospital antibiotic therapy in invasive meningococcal diseases remains unclear with contradictory data. The aim was to determine this role in the outcome of invasive meningococcal disease. Observational cohort study of patients with/without pre-hospital antibiotic therapy in invasive meningococcal disease attended at the Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge (Barcelona) during the period 1977-2013. Univariate and multivariate analyses of mortality, corrected by propensity score used as a covariate to adjust for potential confounding, were performed. Patients with pre-hospital antibiotic therapy were also analyzed according to whether they had received oral (group A) or parenteral antibiotics (early therapy) (group B). Five hundred twenty-seven cases of invasive meningococcal disease were recorded and 125 (24%) of them received pre-hospital antibiotic therapy. Shock and age were the risk factors independently related to mortality. Mortality differed between patients with/without pre-hospital antibiotic therapy (0.8% vs. 8%, p = 0.003). Pre-hospital antibiotic therapy seemed to be a protective factor in the multivariate analysis of mortality (p = 0.038; OR, 0.188; 95% CI, 0.013-0.882). However, it was no longer protective when the propensity score was included in the analysis (p = 0.103; OR, 0.173; 95% CI, 0.021-1.423). Analysis of the oral and parenteral pre-hospital antibiotic groups revealed that there were no deaths in early therapy group. Patients able to receive oral antibiotics had less severe symptoms than those who did not receive pre-hospital antibiotics. Age and shock were the factors independently related to mortality. Early parenteral therapy was not associated with death. Oral antibiotic therapy in patients able to take it was associated with a beneficial effect in the prognosis of invasive meningococcal disease.

[Acute care of patients with bacterial meningitis]

BACKGROUND

Bacterial meningitis is a life-threatening emergency that is still associated with high mortality and poor outcome.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to provide a review of clinical presentation, diagnostic procedure, therapy, and prognosis in bacterial meningitis. Prognostic factors which could be influenced positively are identified and a focused procedure in the emergency setting and for the treatment of complications are provided.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This work is based on a literature search (PubMed, guidelines) and personal experience (standard operating procedures, SOP).

RESULTS

Despite improved health care, bacterial meningitis is still associated with high mortality and poor neurological outcome, which has remained largely unaltered during recent decades. Diagnosis and, more importantly, effective therapy of bacterial meningitis are often delayed, having an immediate negative influence on clinical outcome. Neurological and nonneurological complications often necessitate intensive care and may occur rapidly or in the further course of the disease.

CONCLUSION

Immediate initiation of effective therapy is crucial to positively influence mortality and neurological outcome. Antibiotics should be administered within 30 min after admission. To achieve this, a focused and well-organized procedure in the emergency setting is necessary. Because of intra- and extracranial complications, patients need to be treated on intensive care units including neurological expertise and interdisciplinary support.

The role of antimicrobials in the treatment of sepsis and critical illness-related bacterial infections: examination of the evidence

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the evidence behind the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines on antimicrobial therapy in sepsis and evaluate relevant literature in small animal veterinary critical care.

DATA SOURCE

Electronic searches using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases.

HUMAN DATA SYNTHESIS

Current recommendations are to administer appropriate antimicrobials within 1 hour of a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. Evidence is supportive of this recommendation in septic shock but the evidence is less compelling in milder forms of critical illness-related infections. It is unclear when the administration of appropriate antimicrobials is most beneficial and when it should be considered essential. Evidence supports shorter courses of antimicrobial therapy for many infections seen in the critical care unit with the biomarkers procalcitonin and C-reactive protein helpful in guiding the duration of therapy.

VETERINARY DATA SYNTHESIS

Current evidence is lacking to support the use of early and aggressive use of antimicrobials in all patients with critical illness-related bacterial infections. Two studies failed to demonstrate improved survival in patients with pulmonary or abdominal infections administered appropriate vs inappropriate empirical antimicrobials. One study failed to show an improved survival when dogs with abdominal infections were administered antimicrobials within 1 hour vs 6 hours of diagnosis of infection. Information regarding ideal duration of antimicrobial therapy and use of biomarkers to guide therapy is currently lacking.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians should aim to administer early and appropriate antimicrobials; however, the impact this will have on patient outcome remains uncertain. The ability to administer early and appropriate antimicrobials may be considered a measure of the quality of medical practice rather than a prognostic indicator.

An alternate pathophysiologic paradigm of sepsis and septic shock: implications for optimizing antimicrobial therapy

The advent of modern antimicrobial therapy following the discovery of penicillin during the 1940s yielded remarkable improvements in case fatality rate of serious infections including septic shock. Since then, pathogens have continuously evolved under selective antimicrobial pressure resulting in a lack of significant improvement in clinical effectiveness in the antimicrobial therapy of septic shock despite ever more broad-spectrum and potent drugs. In addition, although substantial effort and money has been expended on the development novel non-antimicrobial therapies of sepsis in the past 30 years, clinical progress in this regard has been limited. This review explores the possibility that the current pathophysiologic paradigm of septic shock fails to appropriately consider the primacy of the microbial burden of infection as the primary driver of septic organ dysfunction. An alternate paradigm is offered that suggests that has substantial implications for optimizing antimicrobial therapy in septic shock. This model of disease progression suggests the key to significant improvement in the outcome of septic shock may lie, in great part, with improvements in delivery of existing antimicrobials and other anti-infectious strategies. Recognition of the role of delays in administration of antimicrobial therapy in the poor outcomes of septic shock is central to this effort. However, therapeutic strategies that improve the degree of antimicrobial cidality likely also have a crucial role.

Meningococcal disease serogroup C

Despite current advances in antibiotic therapy and vaccines, meningococcal disease serogroup C (MDC) remains a serious threat to global health, particularly in countries in North and Latin America, Europe, and Asia. MDC is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and neurological sequelae and it is a heavy economic burden. At the individual level, despite advances in antibiotics and supportive therapies, case fatality rate remains nearly 10% and severe neurological sequelae are frequent. At the population level, prevention and control of infection is more challenging. The main approaches include health education, providing information to the public, specific treatment, chemoprophylaxis, and the use of vaccines. Plain and conjugate meningococcal C polysaccharide vaccines are considered safe, are well tolerated, and have been used successfully for over 30 years. Most high-income countries use vaccination as a part of public health strategies, and different meningococcal C vaccination schedules have proven to be effective in reducing incidence. This is particularly so with conjugate vaccines, which have been found to induce immunogenicity in infants (the age group with the highest incidence rates of disease), stimulate immunologic memory, have longer effects, not lead to hyporesponsiveness with repeated dosing, and decrease acquisition of nasopharyngeal carriage, inducing herd immunity. Antibiotics are considered a cornerstone of MDC treatment and must be administered empirically as soon as possible. The choice of which antibiotic to use should be made based on local antibiotic resistance, availability, and circulating strains. Excellent options for a 7-day course are penicillin, ampicillin, chloramphenicol, and third-generation cephalosporins (ceftriaxone and cefotaxime) intravenously, although the latter are considerably more expensive than the others. The use of steroids as adjunctive therapy for MDC is still controversial and remains a topic of debate. A combination of all of the aforementioned approaches is useful in the prevention and control of MDC, and each country should tailor its public health policy to its own particular needs and knowledge of disease burden.

Early antimicrobial therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock

The advent of modern antimicrobial therapy following the discovery of penicillin during the 1940s yielded remarkable improvements in the case fatality rates of serious infections, including septic shock. Since then, pathogens have continuously evolved under selective antimicrobial pressure, resulting in a lack of additional significant improvement in clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial therapy of septic shock despite ever more broad-spectrum and potent drugs. In addition, although substantial effort and money were expended on the development of novel nonantimicrobial therapies of sepsis in the past 30 years, clinical progress in this regard has been limited. This article explores the possibility that the key to significant improvement in the outcome of septic shock may lie, in great part, with improvements in delivery of existing antimicrobials. Recognizing the role of delays in administration of antimicrobial therapy in the poor outcomes of septic shock is central to this effort.

We should be measuring genomic bacterial load and virulence factors

OBJECTIVE

To describe relevant pathogen-related characteristics and their impact on sepsis pathogenesis and prognosis.

DATA SOURCE

Current literature regarding genomic bacterial load and virulence factors, with an emphasis on the impact of these factors on pathophysiology and prognosis of sepsis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The current paradigm on sepsis pathophysiology and management overlooks aspects concerning the nature and characteristics of the infecting pathogen. Our findings suggest that evaluation of genomic bacterial load might be useful to assess severity and predict prognosis in septic patients; its use during treatment for monitoring clinical response is another interesting potential application. Virulence factors identification might help to develop pathogen-specific therapeutic strategies for higher-risk septic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The recognition of the importance of quantifying the pathogen has major clinical implications and will open up a new field of exploration of therapies targeted at anticipating development and appropriate treatment in severe sepsis. The improved detection and understanding of bacterial virulence factors may lead to specific therapies.