Antibiotic stewardship in neonates and in neonatal intensive care units

Antimicrobial Stewardship: A Correct Management to Reduce Sepsis in NICU Settings

The discovery of antimicrobial drugs has led to a significant increase in survival from infections; however, they are very often prescribed and administered, even when their use is not necessary and appropriate. Newborns are particularly exposed to infections due to the poor effectiveness and the immaturity of their immune systems. For this reason, in Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs), the use of antimicrobial drugs is often decisive and life-saving, and it must be started promptly to ensure its effectiveness in consideration of the possible rapid evolution of the infection towards sepsis. Nevertheless, the misuse of antibiotics in the neonatal period leads not only to an increase in the development and wide spreading of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) but it is also associated with various short-term (e.g., alterations of the microbiota) and long-term (e.g., increased risk of allergic disease and obesity) effects. It appears fundamental to use antibiotics only when strictly necessary; specific decision-making algorithms and electronic calculators can help limit the use of unnecessary antibiotic drugs. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the right balance between the risks and benefits of antimicrobial therapy in NICUs; for this purpose, specific Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) in neonatal care and the creation of a specific antimicrobial stewardship team are requested.

Prescription of Aminoglycosides in 23 French Neonatal Intensive Care Units

Background: Aminoglycosides are the most prescribed antibiotics in neonatal intensive care units (NICU). Reducing exposure to antibiotics in the NICU is highly desirable, particularly through benchmarking methods. Methods: Description of aminoglycosides prescriptions in 23 French NICU using the same computerized system over a 4-year period (2017–2020). A benchmarking program of antibiotics prescription was associated. Results: The population included 53,818 patients. Exposition rates to gentamicin and amikacin were 31.7% (n = 17,049) and 9.1% (n = 4894), respectively. Among neonates exposed to gentamicin, 90.4% of gentamicin and 77.6% of amikacin treatments were started within the 1st week of life. Among neonates exposed to amikacin, 77.6% started amikacin within the 1st week. The average daily dose of gentamicin at first prescription increased over the study period from 3.9 in 2017 to 4.4 mg/kg/d in 2020 (p < 0.0001). Conversely, the corresponding amikacin daily doses decreased from 13.0 in 2017 to 12.3 mg/kg/d in 2020 (p = 0.001). The time interval between the first 2 doses of gentamicin was mainly distributed in 3 values during the first week of life: 49.4% at 24 h, 26.4% at 36 h, and 22.9% at 48 h. At first amikacin prescription, the time interval was distributed in 4 categories: 48% at 24 h, 4.1% at 30 h, 8.5% at 36 h, and 37.1% at 48 h. As compared to literature guidelines, the rates of overdose and underdose in gentamicin (1.5% and 2.7%) and amikacin (0.3% and 1.0%). They significantly decreased for gentamicin over the study period. In multivariate analysis, the factors significantly associated with GENT overdose were the year of admission, prematurity, length of stay, and duration of the treatment. Conclusion: This prescription strategy ensured a low rate of overdose and underdose, and some benefits of the benchmarking program is suggested.