1
|
Ji R, He Z, Zhou J, Fang S, Ge L. Antibiotic use at planned central line removal in reducing neonatal post-catheter removal sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Pediatr 2024; 11:1324242. [PMID: 38259593 PMCID: PMC10800366 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1324242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2023] [Accepted: 12/18/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Post-catheter removal sepsis (PCRS) is a notable complication of indwelling central venous catheters (CVCs) in neonates, which is postulated to be secondary to the disruption of biofilms formed along catheter tips up on CVCs removal. It remains controversial whether this could be prevented by antibiotic use upon CVCs removal. We aimed to evaluate the protective effect of antibiotic administration at the time of CVCs removal. Methods We searched through PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane databases and reference lists of review articles for studies comparing the use of antibiotics versus no use within 12 h of CVCs removal. Risk of bias was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool accordingly. Results of quantitative analyses were presented as mean differences (MD) or odds ratio (OR). Subgroup and univariate meta-regression analyses were performed to identify heterogeneity. Results The review included 470 CVCs in the antibiotic group and 658 in the control group. Antibiotic use within 12 h of CVCs removal did not significantly reduce the incidence of PCRS (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.08-1.53), but was associated with a lower incidence of post-catheter removal blood stream infection (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.11-0.86). Dosage of vancomycin and world region were major sources of heterogeneity. Conclusion Antibiotic administration upon CVCs removal does not significantly reduce the incidence of PCRS but offers less post-catheter removal blood stream infection. Whether this will be converted to better clinical outcomes lacks evidential support. Further randomized controlled studies with longer follow-up are needed. Summary Results of our meta-analysis suggest that antibiotic use at planned central line removal removal does not significantly reduce the incidence of PCRS but offers less blood stream infection, which might contribute to future management of central lines in neonates. Systematic Review Registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42022359677).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruoyu Ji
- Department of Allergy, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Zhangyuting He
- Department of Haematology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Jiawei Zhou
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Shiyuan Fang
- Department of Neurology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Lili Ge
- Department of Pediatrics (Neonatology), Yancheng Third People’s Hospital, Yancheng, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ou-Yang MC, Hsu JF, Chu SM, Chang CM, Chen CC, Huang HR, Yang PH, Fu RH, Tsai MH. Influences of Initial Empiric Antibiotics with Ampicillin plus Cefotaxime on the Outcomes of Neonates with Respiratory Failure: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis. Antibiotics (Basel) 2023; 12:antibiotics12030445. [PMID: 36978311 PMCID: PMC10044461 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12030445] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2023] [Revised: 02/16/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 02/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Empiric antibiotics are often prescribed in critically ill and preterm neonates at birth until sepsis can be ruled out. Although the current guideline suggests narrow-spectrum antibiotics, an upgrade in antibiotics is common in the neonatal intensive care unit. The impacts of initial broad-spectrum antibiotics on the outcomes of critically ill neonates with respiratory failure requiring mechanical intubation have not been well studied. Methods: A total of 1162 neonates from a tertiary level neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Taiwan who were on mechanical ventilation for respiratory distress/failure at birth were enrolled, and neonates receiving ampicillin plus cefotaxime were compared with those receiving ampicillin plus gentamicin. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to investigate the effects of ampicillin plus cefotaxime on the outcomes of critically ill neonates. Results: Ampicillin plus cefotaxime was more frequently prescribed for intubated neonates with lower birth weight, higher severity of illness, and those with a high risk of early-onset sepsis. Only 11.1% of these neonates had blood culture-confirmed early-onset sepsis and/or congenital pneumonia. The use of ampicillin plus cefotaxime did not significantly contribute to improved outcomes among neonates with early-onset sepsis. After propensity score-matched analyses, the critically ill neonates receiving ampicillin plus cefotaxime had significantly worse outcomes than those receiving ampicillin plus gentamicin, including a higher risk of late-onset sepsis caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens (11.2% versus 7.1%, p = 0.027), longer duration of hospitalization (median [IQR], 86.5 [47–118.8] days versus 78 [45.0–106.0] days, p = 0.002), and a significantly higher risk of in-hospital mortality (14.2% versus 9.6%, p = 0.023). Conclusions: Ampicillin plus cefotaxime should not be routinely prescribed as the empiric antibiotics for critically ill neonates at birth because they were associated with a higher risk of infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens and final worse outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mei-Chen Ou-Yang
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung 833, Taiwan
| | - Jen-Fu Hsu
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Shih-Ming Chu
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Ching-Min Chang
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Pediatric Gastrointestinal Disease, Department of Pediatrics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi 613, Taiwan
| | - Chih-Chen Chen
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung 833, Taiwan
| | - Hsuan-Rong Huang
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Peng-Hong Yang
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Pediatric Gastrointestinal Disease, Department of Pediatrics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi 613, Taiwan
| | - Ren-Huei Fu
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Ming-Horng Tsai
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Division of Neonatology and Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Yunlin 638, Taiwan
- Correspondence: ; Tel.:+886-5-691-5151 (ext. 2878); Fax: +886-5-691-3222
| |
Collapse
|