Percutaneously drained intra-abdominal infections do not require longer duration of antimicrobial therapy

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.

Eleven years impact of a stepwise educational program on healthcare associated infections and antibiotics consumption in an intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Hospital acquired infections (HAI) and liberal use of broad-spectrum antibiotics are common in intensive care unit(ICU)s of low-middle income countries. We investigated the long-term association of a stepwise multifaceted educational program with the incidence of HAIs and antibiotics use in a Brazilian ICU. We also evaluated the program's cost impact.

METHODS

We retrieved data from a prospective daily collected database of a twelve bedrooms ICU, all admitted patients within a period of eleven years were enrolled.

FINDINGS

From 03/15/2007 to 09/11/2019, we admitted 3059 patients where 2406 (79%) survived the ICU stay. Median age was 51 years-old, and median SAPS3 was 53. The initial density of catheter related blood infection (4.3 events / 1000 patients-day), urinary tract infection (9.2 event / 1000 patients-day) and ventilator associated pneumonia (54.9 events / 1000 patients-day) felt during the observed period to (0.35 events / 1000 patients-day), (0 events / 1000 patients-day), and (1.5 events / 1000 patients-day) respectively. The days of antibiotic therapy also decreased from 797.9 days of therapy / 1000 patients day to 292.3 days of therapy / 1000 patients day. The total cost per patient also decreased. The adjusted mortality rate was steady during the studied period from 23.2% to 22.9%.

INTERPRETATION

A stepwise multifaceted educational program is an effective way to reduce hospital-associated infections, improve the rational use of antibiotics, and reduce costs. This impact occurred in a long term, and is probably consistent.

Intra-abdominal Infections

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are a common cause of sepsis, and frequently occur in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. IAIs include many diagnoses, including peritonitis, cholangitis, diverticulitis, pancreatitis, abdominal abscess, intestinal perforation, abdominal trauma, and pelvic inflammatory disease. IAIs are the second most common cause of infectious morbidity and mortality in the ICU after pneumonia. IAIs are also the second most common cause of sepsis in critically ill patients, and affect approximately 5% of ICU patients. Mortality with IAI in ICU patients ranges from 5 to 50%, with the wide variability related to the specific IAI present, associated patient comorbidities, severity of illness, and organ dysfunction and failures. It is important to have a comprehensive understanding of IAIs as potential causes of life-threatening infections in ICU patients to provide the best diagnostic and therapeutic care for optimal patient outcomes in the ICU.

Surgical Infection Society Research Priorities: A Narrative Review of Fourteen Years of Progress

Background: In 2006, the Surgical Infection Society (SIS) utilized a modified Delphi approach to define 15 specific priority research questions that remained unanswered in the field of surgical infections. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the scientific progress achieved during the ensuing period in answering each of the 15 research questions and to determine if additional research in these fields is warranted. Methods: For each of the questions, a literature search using the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) was performed by the Scientific Studies Committee of the SIS to identify studies that attempted to address each of the defined questions. This literature was analyzed and summarized. The data on each question were evaluated by a surgical infections expert to determine if the question was answered definitively or remains unanswered. Results: All 15 priority research questions were studied in the last 14 years; six questions (40%) were definitively answered and 9 questions (60%) remain unanswered in whole or in part, mainly because of the low quality of the studies available on this topic. Several of the 9 unanswered questions were deemed to remain research priorities in 2020 and warrant further investigation. These included, for example, the role of empiric antimicrobial agents in nosocomial infections, the use of inotropes/vasopressors versus volume loading to raise the mean arterial pressure, and the role of increased antimicrobial dosing and frequency in the obese patient. Conclusions: Several surgical infection-related research questions prioritized in 2006 remain unanswered. Further high-quality research is required to provide a definitive answer to many of these priority knowledge gaps. An updated research agenda by the SIS is warranted at this time to define research priorities for the future.

Trends in Antibiotic Duration for Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections : Adaptation to Current Guidelines

INTRODUCTION

The 2017 surgical infection society (SIS) guidelines recommend 4 days of antibiotic therapy after source control for complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs). Inappropriate exposure to antibiotics has a negative impact on outcomes in individual patients and populations. The goal of this study was to evaluate our institution's practice patterns and adherence to current antibiotic guidelines.

METHODS

Medical records from 2010 to 2018 for cIAIs were examined. Complicated appendicitis and complicated diverticulitis cases were included. Exclusion criteria included other etiologies of IAIs, pediatric cases, and cancer operations.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine complicated appendicitis cases and 96 complicated diverticulitis cases were identified. For all cases, antibiotic duration prior to publication of the SIS guidelines was significantly longer than post-SIS duration (appendicitis: 12.6 ± 1.1 days pre-SIS [n = 37] vs 9.0 ± 1.1 days post-SIS [n = 22], P = .01; diverticulitis: 15.1 ± 0.8 days pre-SIS [n = 49] vs 11.2 ± 0.5 post-SIS [n = 47], P = .04). Surgical management (SM) was associated with shorter duration of postsource control antibiotic exposure compared with percutaneous drainage (PD) for both appendicitis (SM 10.0 ± 1.2 days vs PD 13.4 ± 1.0 days, P = .02) and diverticulitis (SM 12.8 ± 1.5 days vs PD 16.0 ± 1.5, P = .07). Patients with complicated appendicitis received shorter duration of antibiotics when managed by acute care surgeons compared to general surgeons (8.4 ± 1.1 vs 11.9 ± 0.8, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Despite improvements after the SIS guidelines' publication, the antibiotic duration is still longer than recommended. Surgical intervention and management by acute care specialists were associated with a shorter duration of antibiotic exposure.

Sepsis 2019: What Surgeons Need to Know

The definition of sepsis continues to be as dynamic as the management strategies used to treat this. Sepsis-3 has replaced the earlier systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS)-based diagnoses with the rapid Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score assisting in predicting overall prognosis with regards to mortality. Surgeons have an important role in ensuring adequate source control while recognizing the threat of carbapenem-resistance in gram-negative organisms. Rapid diagnostic tests are being used increasingly for the early identification of multi-drug-resistant organisms (MDROs), with a key emphasis on the multidisciplinary alert of results. Novel, higher generation antibiotic agents have been developed for resistance in ESKCAPE (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter species) organisms while surgeons have an important role in the prevention of spread. The Study to Optimize Peritoneal Infection Therapy (STOP-IT) trial has challenged the previous paradigm of length of antibiotic treatment whereas biomarkers such as procalcitonin are playing a prominent role in individualizing therapy. Several novel therapies for refractory septic shock, while still investigational, are gaining prominence rapidly (such as vitamin C) whereas others await further clinical trials. Management strategies presented as care bundles continue to be updated by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, yet still remain controversial in its global adoption. We have broadened our temporal and epidemiologic perspective of sepsis by understanding it both as an acute, time-sensitive, life-threatening illness to a chronic condition that increases the risk of mortality up to five years post-discharge. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and bedside scoring systems can assist the clinician in predicting post-operative sepsis. The public health role of the surgeon is key. This includes collaboration and multi-disciplinary antibiotic stewardship at a hospital level. It also requires controlling pharmaceutical sales and the unregulated dispensing of antibiotic agents globally through policy initiatives to control emerging resistance through prevention.

Optimal duration of antibiotic treatment in Gram-negative infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Whilst many guidelines recommend limiting the use of antibiotics because of the increase in antimicrobial resistance (AMR), this strategy becomes challenging when dealing with severe infections in critically ill patients. Moreover, some Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) can exhibit mechanisms of resistance that make the patient more vulnerable to recurrence of infections. We reviewed recent data on the optimal duration of antibiotic therapy in these patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Apart from having no additional clinical benefit at a certain point after initiation, antibiotics might have negative effects. Prolonged antibiotic exposure has been associated to development of AMR and represents a strong reason to avoid long courses of antibiotic therapy in GNB infections. Recent data suggest that also patients with severe infections, in whom source control is adequate, can be managed with short-course antibiotic therapy.

SUMMARY

The optimal duration of antibiotic therapy depends on many factors, but overall, many infections in the critically ill can be treated with short-course antibiotic therapy (7 days or less). The integration of signs of resolution, biomarkers, clinical judgment, and microbiologic eradication might help to define this optimal duration in patients with life-threatening infections caused by GNB.

Is fixed short-course antimicrobial therapy justified for patients who are critically ill with intra-abdominal infections?

A long-course antibiotic therapy increases the risk of antibiotic resistance. A 7- to 14-day duration of therapy has been traditionally adopted in patients with intra-abdominal infections (IAIs). Prophylactic antibiotic use is warranted in uncomplicated IAIs, in which the infection involves a single organ, and the source of the infection is completely eradicated by a surgical procedure. A large, randomized clinical trial of the treatment of complicated IAIs recently demonstrated that a fixed 4-day course of antibiotic therapy was as effective as a long-course therapy in patients who underwent adequate source control. Considering the poor prognosis and lack of clear evidence available for shortening the duration of antibiotic therapy in patients who are critically ill or those with ongoing signs of sepsis, the duration of therapy for complicated IAIs should be individually determined according to the clinical course. Limiting therapy to no more than 7 days seems to be warranted in patients who are critically ill with a good clinical response.

Fluoroquinolone-based versus β-lactam-based regimens for complicated intra-abdominal infections: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) are common and confer significant morbidity, mortality and costs. In this era of evolving antimicrobial resistance, selection of appropriate empirical antimicrobials is paramount. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials compared the effectiveness and safety of fluoroquinolone (FQ)-based versus β-lactam (BL)-based regimens for the treatment of patients with cIAIs. Primary outcomes were treatment success in the clinically evaluable (CE) population and all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Subgroup analyses were performed based on specific antimicrobials, infection source and isolated pathogens. Seven trials (4125 patients) were included. FQ-based regimens included moxifloxacin (four studies) or ciprofloxacin/metronidazole (three studies); BL-based regimens were ceftriaxone/metronidazole (three studies), carbapenems (two studies) or piperacillin/tazobactam (two studies). There was no difference in effectiveness in the CE (2883 patients; RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.95-1.04) or ITT populations (3055 patients; RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.01). Mortality (3614 patients; RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.75-1.43) and treatment-related adverse events (2801 patients; RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.70-1.33) were also similar. On subset analysis, moxifloxacin was slightly less effective than BLs in the CE (1934 patients; RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99) and ITT populations (1743 patients; RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.98). Although FQ- and BL-based regimens appear equally effective and safe for the treatment of cIAIs, limited data suggest slightly inferior results with moxifloxacin. Selection of empirical coverage should be based on local bacterial epidemiology and patterns of resistance as well as antimicrobial stewardship protocols.

Abdominal sepsis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the recent evidence on the treatment of abdominal sepsis with a specific emphasis on the surgical treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

A multitude of surgical approaches towards abdominal sepsis are practised. Recent evidence shows that immediate closure of the abdomen has a better outcome. A short course of antibiotics has a similar effect as a long course of antibiotics in patients with intra-abdominal infection without severe sepsis.

SUMMARY

Management of abdominal sepsis requires a multidisciplinary approach. Closing the abdomen permanently after source control and only reopening it in case of deterioration of the patient without other (percutaneous) options is the preferred strategy. There is no convincing evidence that damage control surgery is beneficial in patients with abdominal sepsis. If primary closure of the abdomen is impossible because of excessive visceral edema, delayed closure using negative pressure therapy with continuous mesh-mediated fascial traction shows the best results.

Unmet needs in the management of intra-abdominal infections

INTRODUCTION

Intra-abdominal infections remain a leading cause of death, morbidity and resource use in surgical wards and intensive care units. The growing complexity of their management has led to new paradigms and unresolved issues in anti-infective therapy described in the current review. Areas covered: We analyzed the literature, recent guidelines, and expert opinions published over the last decade. Expert commentary: Prospective randomized trials are difficult to perform and observational studies or database analyses should be encouraged. Epidemiologic and microbiologic reports should be promoted, especially in developing/resource-limited countries and in specific subpopulations such as children, older people and patients with underlying diseases. The diagnostic process, including imaging procedures, could be improved. The value of biomarkers for diagnosis, monitoring and discontinuation of therapy should be clarified and improved. New microbiologic techniques are needed to speed up the diagnostic process and to improve the adequacy of anti-infective therapy. Very little progress has been made in the detection of clinical failures. Many aspects of anti-infective management, both for bacteria and fungi, remain unresolved, such as the high inoculum, the type of microorganisms to be treated, the timing of therapy, the value of de-escalation, drug monitoring and duration of therapy. New antibiotics are expected.