Optimal Treatment for Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections in the Era of Antibiotic Resistance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Combined Therapy With Metronidazole

The Surgical Infection Society Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection: 2024 Update

Background: The Surgical Infection Society (SIS) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) in 1992, 2002, 2010, and 2017. Here, we present the most recent guideline update based on a systematic review of current literature. Methods: The writing group, including current and former members of the SIS Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee and other individuals with content or guideline expertise within the SIS, working with a professional librarian, performed a systematic review using PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science from 2016 until February 2024. Keyword descriptors combined "surgical site infections" or "intra-abdominal infections" in adults limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Additional relevant publications not in the initial search but identified during literature review were included. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system was utilized to evaluate the evidence. The strength of each recommendation was rated strong (1) or weak (2). The quality of the evidence was rated high (A), moderate (B), or weak (C). The guideline contains new recommendations and updates to recommendations from previous IAI guideline versions. Final recommendations were developed by an iterative process. All writing group members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: This updated evidence-based guideline contains recommendations from the SIS for the treatment of adult patients with IAI. Evidence-based recommendations were developed for antimicrobial agent selection, timing, route of administration, duration, and de-escalation; timing of source control; treatment of specific pathogens; treatment of specific intra-abdominal disease processes; and implementation of hospital-based antimicrobial agent stewardship programs. Summary: This document contains the most up-to-date recommendations from the SIS on the prevention and management of IAI in adult patients.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of antimicrobial agents for complicated intra-abdominal infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Which antimicrobial agents provide the optimal efficacy, safety, and tolerability for the empirical treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) remains unclear but is paramount in the context of evolving antimicrobial resistance. Therefore, updated meta-analyses on this issue are warranted.

METHODS

We systematically searched four major electronic databases from their inception through October 2022. Randomized controlled trials examining antimicrobial agents for cIAI treatment were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool as described in the updated version 1 of the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and extracted data from all manuscripts according to a predetermined list of topics. All meta-analyses were conducted using R software. The primary outcome was clinical success rate in patients with cIAIs.

RESULTS

Forty-five active-controlled trials with low to medium methodological quality and involving 14,267 adults with cIAIs were included in the network meta-analyses. The vast majority of patients with an acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score < 10 had low risk of treatment failure or death. Twenty-one regimens were investigated. In the network meta-analyses, cefepime plus metronidazole was more effective than tigecycline and ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96, 95% credibility interval [CrI] 1.05 ~ 3.79; OR = 3.09, 95% CrI 1.02 ~ 9.79, respectively). No statistically significant differences were found among antimicrobial agents regarding microbiological success rates. Cefepime plus metronidazole had lower risk of all-cause mortality than tigecycline (OR = 0.22, 95% CrI 0.05 ~ 0.85). Statistically significant trends were observed favoring cefotaxime plus metronidazole, which exhibited fewer discontinuations because of adverse events (AEs) when compared with eravacycline, meropenem and ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole (OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.8; OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.7; OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.64, respectively). Compared with tigecycline, eravacycline was associated with fewer discontinuations because of AEs (OR = 0.17, 95% CrI 0.03 ~ 0.81). Compared with meropenem, ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole had a higher rate of discontinuation due to AEs (OR = 2.09, 95% CrI 1.0 ~ 4.41). In pairwise meta-analyses, compared with ceftriaxone plus metronidazole, ertapenem and moxifloxacin (one trial, OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.06 ~ 3.50; one trial, OR = 4.24, 95% CI 1.18 ~ 15.28, respectively) were associated with significantly increased risks of serious AEs. Compared with imipenem/cilastatin, tigecycline (four trials, OR = 1.57, 95%CI 1.07 ~ 2.32) was associated with a significantly increased risk of serious AEs. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Cefepime plus metronidazole was more likely to be optimal among all treatments in terms of efficacy and safety, tigecycline was more likely to be worst regimen in terms of tolerability, and eravacycline was more likely to be best tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that cefepime plus metronidazole is optimal for empirical treatment of patients with cIAIs and that tigecycline should be prescribed cautiously considering the safety and tolerability concerns. However, it should be noted that data currently available on the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of antimicrobial agents pertain mostly to lower-risk patients with cIAIs.

Epidemiological Characteristics, Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profile, and Surgical Outcome of Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infection at a Tertiary Hospital in Somalia

Background

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and one of the leading causes of non-trauma deaths in hospitals worldwide. Because of limited resources, most patients in low-income countries experience delayed diagnosis and treatment. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the epidemiological characteristics, antimicrobial susceptibility profile, and outcome of patients with complicated IAI at a tertiary hospital in Somalia.

Methods

This study included all patients with confirmed IAIs who underwent laparotomy or percutaneous drainage, either emergency or elective, and whose cultures showed growth. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, culture results, antimicrobial susceptibility profile, and the type of source control were reviewed.

Results

The prevalence of CIAI was 5.3%, 144 (70%) were male, and 61 (30%) were female. The mean age was 38.6±8.5 years. Appendicitis was the most common source of infection, accounting for 32%, followed by bowel perforation in 37 (18%). Out of 15 patients with liver abscesses, ten patients had diabetes (67%). E. coli 82 (40%) was the most common isolated organism, followed by Klebsiella pneumonia (n = 44, 21.5%). The prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and multidrug-resistant pathogens was 6.8% and 5.9%, respectively. The pathogens revealed a higher antimicrobial resistance against penicillins in 62%, cephalosporins in 54%, and fluoroquinolones in 44%. E. coli showed 2.5–13% antimicrobial resistance against carbapenems, lower than Klebsiella pneumonia in about 4.5%. Tigecycline, teicoplanin, and linezolid revealed the highest sensitivity against pathogens, about 100%. Source control was achieved by laparotomy in 81%, while the 19% were managed in a percutaneous approach. The mortality rate in our study was 9.3%.

Conclusion

The prevalence of CIAI in our study was 5.3%, with an increasing number of MDR microorganisms isolated from cultures. CIAI and intra-abdominal abscess are significant sources of high morbidity and mortality with sepsis and poor clinical outcome; thus, early detection and intervention are crucial.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Eravacycline in Bacteremic Patients with Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infection: A Pooled Analysis from the IGNITE1 and IGNITE4 Studies

Background: Eravacycline is a novel, fully synthetic fluorocycline antibiotic that was evaluated for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) in two phase 3 clinical trials. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the clinical cure and microbiologic response at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit and the safety of eravacycline in patients with cIAI and baseline bacteremia who received eravacycline versus comparators. Patients and Methods: Pooled data of patients with bacteremia from the Investigating Gram-Negative Infections Treated with Eravacycline (IGNITE) 1 and IGNITE4 studies were analyzed. All patients were randomly assigned in a one-to-one ratio to receive eravacycline 1 mg/kg intravenously every 12 hours, ertapenem 1 g intravensouly every 24 hours (IGNITE1), or meropenem 1 g intravenously every eight hours (IGNITE4) for four to 14 days. Blood and intra-abdominal samples were collected from all patients at baseline. Clinical outcome and microbiologic eradiation at the TOC visit (28 days after randomization) and safety in the microbiologic-intent-to-treat population (micro-ITT) were assessed. Results: Of 415 patients treated with eravacycline and 431 treated with carbapenem comparators, concurrent bacteremia was identified in 32 (7.7%) and 31 (7.2%) patients, respectively. Demographic and baseline characteristics were similar among treatment groups. In the micro-ITT population, the pooled clinical response at the TOC visit for eravacycline was 28 of 32 (87.5%) and was 24 of 31 (77.0%) for comparators among the subgroup with baseline bacteremia (treatment difference 5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.5 to 17.4). At TOC, microbiologic eradication of pathogens isolated from blood specimens occurred for 34 of 35 (97.1%) pathogens with eravacycline and 35 of 36 (97.2%) pathogens with comparators. The incidence of adverse events was comparable between treated groups and similar to that observed in the non-bacteremic population. Conclusion: Eravacycline demonstrated a similar clinical outcome and microbiologic eradication rate as comparator carbapenems in patients with cIAI and associated secondary bacteremia. Future clinical trials of cIAI should report outcomes of this important clinical cohort (cIAI with concurrent bacteremia) given their high risk for adverse outcomes.

Carbapenems vs β-Lactam Monotherapy or Combination Therapy for the Treatment of Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) result in significant morbidity, mortality, and cost. Carbapenem-resistant sepsis has increased dramatically in the last decade, resulting in infections that are difficult to treat and associated with high mortality rates. To prevent further antibacterial resistance, it is necessary to use carbapenem selectively. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of carbapenems vs alternative β-lactam monotherapy or combination therapy for the treatment of cIAIs.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, Medline (via Ovid SP), and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carbapenems vs alternative β-lactam monotherapy or combination therapy for the treatment of cIAIs.

Results

Twenty-two studies involving 7720 participants were included in the analysis. There were no differences in clinical treatment success (odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–1.05; I² = 35%), microbiological treatment success (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.71–1.09; I² = 25%), adverse events (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.87–1.09; I² = 17%), or mortality (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68–1.35; I² = 7%). Patients

treated with imipenem were more likely to experience clinical or microbiological failure than those treated with alternative β-lactam monotherapy or combination therapy.

Conclusions

No differences in clinical outcomes were observed between carbapenems and noncarbapenem β-lactams in cIAIs. Patients treated with imipenem were more likely to experience clinical or microbiological failure than those treated with alternative β-lactam monotherapy or combination therapy.

Metronidazole-induced encephalopathy caused by hyperbaric oxygen therapy in a patient with mandibular osteomyelitis

Metronidazole (MNZ) is prescribed for the treatment of infection caused by anaerobic bacteria and protozoa. Metronidazole-induced encephalopathy (MIE) has been known to be a side-effect, although its onset ratio is unclear. However, to the best of our knowledge, MIE associated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO) has not been previously reported. Here, we present the case of a 68-year-old man with mandibular osteomyelitis who received metronidazole for 49 days and received five times HBO therapy. He visited our hospital for evaluation and treatment of peripheral neuropathy, speech disturbance, nausea, and disturbance of gait after 47 days of initiating metronidazole treatment. Brain magnetic resonance imaging revealed hyperintense lesions in the cerebellar dentate nuclei, which was consistent with MIE. The patient's ataxic symptoms improved in 15 days after the discontinuation of MNZ. This is the first report demonstrating case of MIE could be related with HBO, as far as we had searched.

A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, comparison study of the efficacy and safety of tigecycline to imipenem/cilastatin to treat complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized subjects in China

Purpose

To assess the efficacy and safety of tigecycline in treating complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) in hospitalized patients in China.

Patients and methods

A Phase IV, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, active-controlled, non-inferiority study was conducted. Hospitalized cIAI patients ≥18 years of age were randomized (1:1) to receive intravenous tigecycline (initial dose 100 mg, then 50 mg q12h) or imipenem/cilastatin (500 mg/500 mg or adjusted for renal dysfunction, q6h) for 5–14 days. The primary end point was clinical response for clinically evaluable (CE) subjects at test-of-cure (TOC) assessment.

Results

Four hundred and seventy subjects were randomized; 232 in the tigecycline and 231 in the imipenem/cilastatin group were treated. Tigecycline was non-inferior to imipenem/cilastatin with respect to clinical response at TOC for all CE subjects, ie, the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI (−12.0%, −1.4%) for the treatment difference in cure rate, tigecycline (89.9%) minus imipenem/cilastatin (96.6%), was >−15%. As non-inferiority was concluded in the CE population, superiority of tigecycline over imipenem/cilastatin and superiority of imipenem/cilastatin over tigecycline were tested on the CE and the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) populations according to pre-specified statistical criteria, and neither could be demonstrated (the cure rate was 82.8% vs 88.7%, difference −6.0% [−12.8%, 0.8%], for the mITT population). The subject-level microbiological response rate at TOC for the microbiologically evaluable population was 88.0% (110/125) vs 95.3% (102/107, difference −7.3% [−15.2%, 0.5%]). Nausea, drug ineffectiveness, postoperative wound infection, vomiting, and pyrexia were the most common adverse events in tigecycline-treated subjects; pyrexia, nausea, vomiting, and increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels were most common in imipenem/cilastatin-treated subjects; none were unanticipated.

Conclusion

Tigecycline was non-inferior to imipenem/cilastatin in treating hospitalized adult patients with cIAI. Superiority of tigecycline over imipenem/cilastatin or imipenem/cilastatin over tigecycline could not be demonstrated. Safety was consistent with the known profile for tigecycline.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT01721408.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam in the treatment of Gram-negative bacterial infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Data on the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) are limited. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to clarify the role of CAZ-AVI for patients with serious Gram-negative bacterial infections. The PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies involving CAZ-AVI. Summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a fixed- or random-effects model. Twelve articles (4951 patients) were included, consisting of nine RCTs and three observational studies comparing CAZ-AVI with other regimens, e.g. carbapenems or colistin. CAZ-AVI showed a comparable clinical response (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.02; I2 = 0%) and non-inferior bacterial eradication (RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.93-1.17; I2 = 79.1%) to carbapenems. No significant difference was detected between groups regarding mortality and adverse events. Moreover, subgroup analyses demonstrated that CAZ-AVI improved the clinical response (RR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.13-2.29) with reduced mortality (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.63) in patients infected by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae versus comparators. Likewise, CAZ-AVI improved the clinical cure rate of bloodstream infections (RR = 2.11, 95% CI 1.54-2.88). An improved ability of CAZ-AVI in microbiological eradication was also detected in patients with complicated urinary tract infections (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.05-1.21). CAZ-AVI exhibited comparable efficacy and safety with carbapenems. Therefore, this agent might be a potential powerful agent for patients with serious Gram-negative bacterial infections.

In vitro activity of lascufloxacin, a novel fluoroquinolone antibacterial agent, against various clinical isolates of anaerobes and Streptococcus anginosus group

The in vitro activities of lascufloxacin were evaluated by comparison with seven reference compounds using 412 clinical isolates of anaerobes and Streptococcus anginosus group. Lascufloxacin showed potent and broad antibacterial activities greater than those of existing quinolones against the clinical isolates used in this study.