Oral rifampin for prevention of S. aureus carriage-related infections in patients with renal failure--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Distribution and Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria and Risk Factors Among Kidney Transplantation Recipients with Infections Over 13 Years: A Retrospective Study

Background

Infection ranks as the most common complication after kidney transplantation (KT) and threatens outcomes of kidney transplantation recipients (KTR). This study aimed to investigate the microbiological profile of infection, assess bacterial resistance and identify risk factors for multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial infection among KTR.

Methods

During the study period, 866 recipients underwent kidney transplant surgery. We studied the distribution of pathogens, resistance rate of MDR bacteria and the risk factors of MDR bacterial infection.

Results

Totally, 214 species of pathogens (110 species were MDR bacteria) were isolated in 119 KTR. Escherichia coli (E. coli) was the most common bacteria of the infection. MDR extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) were most resistant to ampicillin, cefazolin, ciprofloxacin and complex sulfamethoxazole, while quite sensitive to imipenem, amikacin and piperacillin/tazobactam (PIT). All MDR gram-positive bacteria were quite sensitive to linezolid and vancomycin, except that MDR Staphylococcus was also susceptible to rifampicin. Female gender (OR = 3.497, 95% CI = 1.445–8.467, P = 0.006), pathogen types > 1 (OR = 3.832, 95% CI = 1.429–10.273, P = 0.008) and postoperative time < 3 months (OR = 0.331, 95% CI = 0.137–0.799, P = 0.014) were independent risk factors for MDR bacterial infection.

Conclusion

PIT and amikacin may be an alternative choice of ESBL-E infection. Rifampicin can also be prescribed for MDR Staphylococcus infection. MDR bacterial infection was associated with female gender, pathogen types more than 1 and 3 months postoperative period.

Intestinal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus causes prosthetic infection via 'Trojan Horse' mechanism: Evidence from a rat model

Aims

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) can cause wound infections via a 'Trojan Horse' mechanism, in which neutrophils engulf intestinal MRSA and travel to the wound, releasing MRSA after apoptosis. The possible role of intestinal MRSA in prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is unknown.

Methods

Rats underwent intestinal colonization with green fluorescent protein (GFP)-tagged MRSA by gavage and an intra-articular wire was then surgically implanted. After ten days, the presence of PJI was determined by bacterial cultures of the distal femur, joint capsule, and implant. We excluded several other possibilities for PJI development. Intraoperative contamination was excluded by culturing the specimen obtained from surgical site. Extracellular bacteraemia-associated PJI was excluded by comparing with the infection rate after intravenous injection of MRSA or MRSA-carrying neutrophils. To further support this theory, we tested the efficacy of prophylactic membrane-permeable and non-membrane-permeable antibiotics in this model.

Results

After undergoing knee surgery eight or 72 hours after colonization, five out of 20 rats (25.0%) and two out of 20 rats (10.0%) developed PJI, respectively. Strikingly, 11 out of 20 rats (55.0%) developed PJI after intravenous injection of MRSA-carrying neutrophils that were isolated from rats with intestinal MRSA colonization. None of the rats receiving intravenous injections of MRSA developed PJI. These results suggest that intestinal MRSA carried by neutrophils could cause PJI in our rat model. Ten out of 20 (50.0%) rats treated with non-membrane-permeable gentamicin developed PJI, whereas only one out of 20 (5.0%) rats treated with membrane-permeable linezolid developed PJI.

Conclusion

Neutrophils as carriers of intestinal MRSA may play an important role in PJI development.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res. 2020;9(4):152-161.

Antimicrobial approaches in the prevention of Staphylococcus aureus infections: a review

Background

The prophylactic application of antimicrobials that are active against Staphylococcus aureus can prevent infections. However, implementation in clinical practice is limited. We have reviewed antimicrobial approaches for the prevention of S. aureus infections.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and trial registries using synonyms for S. aureus, infections and prevention as search terms. We included randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews only.

Results

Most studies were conducted with mupirocin. Mupirocin is effective in preventing S. aureus infections in patients receiving dialysis treatment and in surgical patients, particularly if the patients are carriers of S. aureus. The combination of mupirocin and chlorhexidine, but not chlorhexidine alone, is also effective against S. aureus infections. So far, vaccines have not proven successful in protecting against S. aureus infections. Regarding prophylactic povidone-iodine and systemic antibiotics, there is limited evidence supporting their effectiveness against S. aureus infections. Antimicrobial honey has not been proven to be more effective or non-inferior to mupirocin in protecting against S. aureus infections.

Conclusions

The current evidence supports the use of mupirocin as prophylaxis for preventing infections with S. aureus, particularly in carriers and in the surgical setting or in patients receiving dialysis treatment. Other antimicrobial agents have not been sufficiently proven to be effective so far, or have been proven ineffective. New trials with vaccines and anti-staphylococcal peptides are currently underway and may lead to new preventive strategies in the future.

Comparing the Effect of Dressing Versus No-dressing on Exit Site Infection and Peritonitis in Chronic Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Bachground:

Peritonitis and exit site (ES) infection are two main complications of peritoneal dialysis. There are some controversies regard to preventive strategies for ES care. In this study we compared peritonitis and ES infection rates in patients with and without dressing.

Materials and Methods:

This historical cohort study carried out on 72 patients under continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis treatment, 54 with dressing versus 18 patients without dressing, followed from October 1, 2010 to March 31, 2011 for peritonitis and ES infection.

Results:

A total of 17 episodes of ES infection occurred in 12 patients in dressing group, but no case was seen in no-dressing group (P = 0.02). Twenty-one episodes of peritonitis occurred in 15 patients in both groups (one episode every 20.6 patient-months). In no-dressing group two episodes occurred in only one patient (one episode every 54 patient-months), and in dressing group, 19 episode in 14 patients (one episode every 17.1 patient-months) (P = 0.03). Peritonitis was significantly more frequent in male versus female in overall patients (38% vs. 14%, P = 0.025) and in dressing group (52% vs. 15%, P = 0.003). In dressing group, peritonitis was more frequent in diabetics versus non-diabetics (48% vs. 11%, P = 0.01). Odds ratio for developing peritonitis was 9.4 in dressing group (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.05 − 84.4; P = 0.045), and 4.4 in men (95% CI = 1.26 − 15.19; P = 0.02).

Conclusion:

In this study, chronic ES care without dressing was associated with lower risk of peritonitis and ES infection.

Case report: profound hypotension after anesthetic induction with propofol in patients treated with rifampin

Rifampin is commonly used for the treatment of tuberculosis and staphylococcal infections, as well as for prevention of infection in cardiac valve and bone surgeries. We report a case of profound hypotension after anesthesia induction with propofol in a patient who was treated with two 600 mg doses of rifampin for prophylaxis of infection before surgery. In a retrospective case-control study of 75 patients, we confirmed this potentially serious drug-drug interaction. After rifampin, there was a significant and prolonged arterial blood pressure reduction when patients received propofol, but not thiopental.

Vascular access-related infections: definitions, incidence rates, and risk factors

Hemodialysis is associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality, often caused by infections. Infections account for approximately 15% of all deaths in this patient population (the second leading cause after cardiovascular events) and for about one-fifth of admissions. Approximately one-fourth of infection-related admissions are caused by dialysis-associated peritonitis or vascular access infection that may lead to such significant complications as endocarditis or death. Published studies that assessed the determinants of hemodialysis-related vascular infections reported inconsistent findings. Variations in the definitions of infection among these studies despite the existence of standard guidelines proposed by at least 3 major work groups may explain, at least in part, these inconsistencies. A comprehensive in-depth review of those studies is needed to examine the inconsistencies in the published results. We first revised the existing vascular access-related infection definitions, then conducted a narrative review of the published literature that examined predictors of vascular access-related infections, highlighting the heterogeneity in methods and findings. Better understanding of the risk factors for vascular access-related infections may inform efficacious prevention strategies and lead to early detection of infections and improved patient care.

Intestinal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus: how does its frequency compare with that of nasal carriage and what is its clinical impact?

The bacterial species Staphylococcus aureus, including its methicillin-resistant variant (MRSA), finds its primary ecological niche in the human nose, but is also able to colonize the intestines and the perineal region. Intestinal carriage has not been widely investigated despite its potential clinical impact. This review summarizes literature on the topic and sketches the current state of affairs from a microbiological and infectious diseases' perspective. Major findings are that the average reported detection rate of intestinal carriage in healthy individuals and patients is 20% for S. aureus and 9% for MRSA, which is approximately half of that for nasal carriage. Nasal carriage seems to predispose to intestinal carriage, but sole intestinal carriage occurs relatively frequently and is observed in 1 out of 3 intestinal carriers, which provides a rationale to include intestinal screening for surveillance or in outbreak settings. Colonization of the intestinal tract with S. aureus at a young age occurs at a high frequency and may affect the host's immune system. The frequency of intestinal carriage is generally underestimated and may significantly contribute to bacterial dissemination and subsequent risk of infections. Whether intestinal rather than nasal S. aureus carriage is a primary predictor for infections is still ill-defined.

Rifampin as adjuvant treatment of Gram-positive bacterial infections: a systematic review of comparative clinical trials

We reviewed the bibliographic evidence from comparative trials regarding the role of rifampin as adjuvant treatment in the treatment of Gram-positive infections [PubMed (1/1950-7/2006)]. Only studies reporting comparative outcome data in patients treated with an antibiotic regimen with the addition or not of rifampin were included. Eight comparative studies were identified [all were randomized controlled trials (RCTs)], five reporting on infections caused by staphylococci (S. aureus in 97% of patients) and three by streptococci. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the treatment arms (with and without rifampin) in any of the included studies. Clinical cure was achieved more commonly (p < 0.05) in the rifampin treatment arm in 3/8 studies; in staphylococcal infections of orthopedic stable implants and in beta-hemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis in children (one RCT each), and in one RCT that reported on patients with various staphylococcal infections. However, no statistically significant difference in cure of the infection between the two groups was found after pooling data from two RCTs (121 patients) that reported on patients with various staphylococcal infections (odds ratio = 0.57; 95% confidence interval 0.27-1.17). No differences were noted between the two groups regarding relapse of infection or adverse events. There is only limited evidence from comparative trials regarding the role of rifampin as adjuvant therapeutic agent for infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria, not allowing for definitive conclusions on this important management question. More controlled trials are necessary for better evaluation of this practice.

Oral rifampin for eradication of Staphylococcus aureus carriage from healthy and sick populations: a systematic review of the evidence from comparative trials

BACKGROUND

Rifampin has been used for the eradication of Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) colonization in various populations of healthy and sick people.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the evidence from randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials that compared the effectiveness and safety of a rifampin-based regimen with another regimen in eradicating S. aureus colonization from healthy and sick people.

RESULTS

Nine comparative trials (6 of which were randomized controlled trials) were included in our analysis. S. aureus was eradicated more commonly in patients receiving rifampin-containing regimens compared to monotherapy with other systemic agents (ciprofloxacin, cloxacillin, minocycline, or vancomycin), both during early and late (>1 month after therapy) post treatment evaluations (odds ratio [OR] 46.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 14.4-148, and OR 8.8, 95% CI 3.4-22.5 respectively, 4 studies included). There was no statistically significant difference between rifampin monotherapy and combinations of rifampin with other topical (bacitracin) or systemic (cloxacillin and minocycline) antibiotics in eradicating S. aureus both in early and late evaluations (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.5-4.4, and OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.7, respectively, 3 studies included). Eradication of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) varied according to the type and duration of the rifampin-containing regimen. It ranged from 25% for the combination of rifampin with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole for 5 days to 100% for the combination of oral rifampin and minocycline for 14 days. Discontinuation of rifampin due to drug-related toxicity was necessary in 2% of 282 studied patients. Development of resistance of S. aureus to rifampin during and after treatment with a regimen containing rifampin ranged from 0% to 40% (7 studies) and overall 17% of the 236 patients for whom relevant data was reported.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests that oral rifampin is an effective agent for the eradication of S. aureus carriage. However, development of antimicrobial resistance during and after treatment with rifampin occurs in a considerable proportion of patients; using rifampin in combination with another antimicrobial agent may decrease this resistance.