Monotherapy with a broad-spectrum beta-lactam is as effective as its combination with an aminoglycoside in treatment of severe generalized peritonitis: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. The Severe Generalized Peritonitis Study Group

Korean Guidelines for Use of Antibiotics for Intra-abdominal Infections in Adults

The guidelines are intended to provide practical information for the correct use of antibiotics for intra-abdominal infections in Korea. With the aim of realizing evidence-based treatment, these guidelines for the use of antibiotics were written to help clinicians find answers to key clinical questions that arise in the course of patient care, using the latest research results based on systematic literature review. The guidelines were prepared in consideration of the data on the causative pathogens of intra-abdominal infections in Korea, the antibiotic susceptibility of the causative pathogens, and the antibiotics available in Korea.

Diagnosis and Management of Intraabdominal Infection: Guidelines by the Chinese Society of Surgical Infection and Intensive Care and the Chinese College of Gastrointestinal Fistula Surgeons

The Chinese guidelines for IAI presented here were developed by a panel that included experts from the fields of surgery, critical care, microbiology, infection control, pharmacology, and evidence-based medicine. All questions were structured in population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes format, and evidence profiles were generated. Recommendations were generated following the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system or Best Practice Statement (BPS), when applicable. The final guidelines include 45 graded recommendations and 17 BPSs, including the classification of disease severity, diagnosis, source control, antimicrobial therapy, microbiologic evaluation, nutritional therapy, other supportive therapies, diagnosis and management of specific IAIs, and recognition and management of source control failure. Recommendations on fluid resuscitation and organ support therapy could not be formulated and thus were not included. Accordingly, additional high-quality clinical studies should be performed in the future to address the clinicians' concerns.

Epidemiology, clinical relevance and prognosis of staphylococci in hospital-acquired postoperative intra-abdominal infections: an observational study in intensive care unit

The pathogenic role of staphylococci in hospital-acquired postoperative intra-abdominal infections (HAIs) has never been evaluated. In a tertiary care university hospital, we assessed the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit for HAIs according to the presence of staphylococci (S-HAI) or their absence (nS-HAI) in peritoneal cultures. Patients with S-HAIs were compared to nS-HAIs patients. Overall, 380 patients were analyzed, including 87 (23%) S-HAI patients [29 Staphylococcus aureus (Sa-HAIs) and 58 coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS-HAIs)]. The clinical characteristics did not differ between the S-HAI and nS-HAI patients. Adequacy of empirical anti-infective therapy was achieved less frequently in the staphylococci group (54 vs 72%, respectively, p < 0.01). The 90-day (primary endpoint) and one-year mortality rates did not differ between these groups. The S-HAI patients had decreased rates of postoperative complication (p < 0.05). The adjusted analysis of the clinical outcomes reported a decreased frequency of surgical complications in the staphylococci group (OR 0.43, 95% CI [0.20–0.93], p = 0.03). While the trends toward decreased morbidity criteria were observed in S-HAI patients, the clinical outcomes were not different between the CoNS-HAI and Sa-HAI patients. In summary, our data are not substantial enough to conclude that staphylococci exhibit no pathogenicity in HAIs.

Outcome of community- versus hospital-acquired intra-abdominal infections in intensive care unit: a retrospective study

Background

To compare patients hospitalised in the intensive care unit (ICU) after surgery for community-acquired intra-abdominal infection (CA-IAI) and hospital-acquired intra-abdominal infection (HA-IAI) in terms of mortality, severity and complications.

Methods

Retrospective study including all patients admitted to 2 ICUs within 48 h of undergoing surgery for peritonitis.

Results

Two hundred twenty-six patients were enrolled during the study period. Patients with CA-IAI had an increased 28-day mortality rate compared to those with HA-IAI (30% vs 15%, respectively (p = 0.009)). At 90 days, the mortality rates were 36.7 and 37.5% in the CA-IAI group and HA-IAI group, respectively, with a similar APACHE II score on admission (median: 21 [15–25] vs. 21 [15–24] respectively, p = 0.63). The patients with HA-IAI had prolonged ICU and hospital stays (median: 17 [7–36] vs. 6[3–12] days, p < 0.001 and 41 [24–66] vs. 17 [7–32] days, p = 0.001), and experienced more complications (reoperation and reintubation) than those with CA-IAI.

Conclusion

CA-IAI group had higher 28-day mortality rate than HA-IAI group. Mortality was similar at 90 days but those with HA-IAI had a prolonged ICU and hospital stay. In addition, they developed more complications.

Antibiotic sensitivity in correlation to the origin of secondary peritonitis: a single center analysis

Despite improvements in diagnosis, intensive-care medicine and surgical technique, the mortality of patients with secondary peritonitis is still high. Early and aggressive empiric antibiotic treatment has strong impact on the outcome. This retrospective study investigates bacterial and fungal pathogens and their antibiotic sensitivity in patients with secondary peritonitis. All patients that underwent emergency laparotomy due to secondary peritonitis at the Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf between 2005 and 2015 were reviewed and overall 414 patients were included. We correlated the intra-abdominal localization of the organ perforation with intraoperative microbiological findings and corresponding sensitivities to relevant antibiotics. Overall, the most common findings were Escherichia coli (39%) and other Enterobacterica (24%). Depending on the location of the perforation, Cefuroxime/Metronidazole and Cefutaxime/Metronidazole were effective (based on in vitro susceptibility testing) in only 55–73% of the patients, while Meropenem/Vancomycin was able to control the peritonitis in more than 98% of the patients; independent of the location. Besides early source control, appropriate empiric treatment plays a pivotal role in treatment of secondary peritonitis. We are able to show that the frequently used combinations of second or third generation Cephalosporins with Metronidazole are not always sufficient, which is due to the biological resistance of the bacteria. Further clinical studies are needed to determine whether calculated use of broad-spectrum antibiotics with a sensitivity rate > 99%, such as Carbapenem plus Vancomycin, can improve overall survival rates in critically ill patients with secondary peritonitis.

[Prediction and differentiated approach in the treatment of patients with secondary peritonitis and abdominal sepsis]

OBJECTIVE

To identify the most important high risk criteria for predicting course of disease, as well as optimal preoperative preparation and surgical strategy in patients with secondary peritonitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective study enrolled 43 patients with diffuse secondary peritonitis.

RESULTS

Significant predictors were Charlson's comorbidity index (p=0.001) and SOFA score of organ dysfunction within 3 days after admission. Rapid regression of organ dysfunction (SOFA1 - p=0.0001, SOFA2 - p=0.012, SOFA3 - p=0.017) and reduced time of examination and preoperative preparation (threshold value - 520 min after admission) are predictors of favorable outcome in patients with diffuse secondary peritonitis. There was no reliable correlation between the treatment outcome and preoperative preparation (infusion volume p=0.23, duration p=0.37, absence/presence of antibacterial therapy p=0.26). Elimination or control of infection is the fundamental principle of the management of patients with diffuse secondary peritonitis.

Microbial findings, sensitivity and outcome in patients with postoperative peritonitis a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Acute postoperative peritonitis resulting from previous abdominal surgery is still a severe and potentially fatal disease, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The aim of the present study was to evaluate patients' outcome after postoperative peritonitis and identify the most effective empiric antibiotic regimes.

METHODS

422 patients with acute postoperative peritonitis as a result to earlier abdominal operation (e.g. anastomotic leakage) were analyzed retrospectively focusing on the origin of the peritonitis, microbial flora and resistance patterns. Furthermore, mortality was estimated according to sensitivity results of the tested antibiotics.

RESULTS

In 50% of the patients, anastomotic leakage was located in the colon. The predominantly cultured microorganisms were Escherichia coli and Enterobacteriaceae. The combination of meropenem and vancomycin was effective in 96% of these microbes. The frequently used combinations of piperacillin/sulbactam and cefotaxime/metronidazole were effective in only 67% and 43%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We were able to show that the currently used antibiotic regimes with piperacillin/sulbactam and cefotaxime/metronidazole are ineffective in a relevant number of patients with anastomotic leakage. Only meropenem or meropenem/vancomycin cover most of the microbes predominant in postoperative peritonitis.

Compliance with an empirical antimicrobial protocol improves the outcome of complicated intra-abdominal infections: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in medical and surgical care, mortality attributed to complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) remains high. Appropriate initial antimicrobial therapy (ABT) is key to successful management. The main causes of non-compliance with empirical protocols have not been clearly described.

METHODS

An empirical ABT protocol was designed according to guidelines, validated in the institution and widely disseminated. All patients with cIAI (2009-2011) were then prospectively studied to evaluate compliance with this protocol and its impact on outcome. Patients were classified into two groups according to whether or not they received ABT in compliance with the protocol.

RESULTS

310 patients were included: 223 (71.9%) with community-acquired and 87 (28.1%) with healthcare-associated cIAI [mean age 60(17-97) yr, mean SAPS II score 24(16)]. Empirical ABT complied with the protocol in 52.3% of patients. The appropriateness of empirical ABT to target the bacteria isolated was 80%. Independent factors associated with non-compliance with the protocol were the anaesthetist's age ≥36 yr [OR 2.1; 95%CI (1.3-3.4)] and the presence of risk factors for multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB) [OR 5.4; 95%CI (3.0-9.5)]. Non-compliance with the protocol was associated with higher mortality (14.9 vs 5.6%, P=0.011) and morbidity: relaparotomy (P=0.047), haemodynamic failure (P=0.001), postoperative pneumonia (P=0.025), longer duration of mechanical ventilation (P<0.001), longer ICU stay (P<0.001) and longer hospital stay (P=0.002). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, non-compliance with the ABT protocol was independently associated with mortality [OR 2.4; 95% CI (1.1-5.7), P=0.04].

CONCLUSIONS

Non-compliance with empirical ABT guidelines in cIAI is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Information campaigns should target older anaesthetists and risk factors for MDRB.

The Surgical Infection Society Revised Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection

BACKGROUND

Previous evidence-based guidelines on the management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) were published by the Surgical Infection Society (SIS) in 1992, 2002, and 2010. At the time the most recent guideline was released, the plan was to update the guideline every five years to ensure the timeliness and appropriateness of the recommendations.

METHODS

Based on the previous guidelines, the task force outlined a number of topics related to the treatment of patients with IAI and then developed key questions on these various topics. All questions were approached using general and specific literature searches, focusing on articles and other information published since 2008. These publications and additional materials published before 2008 were reviewed by the task force as a whole or by individual subgroups as to relevance to individual questions. Recommendations were developed by a process of iterative consensus, with all task force members voting to accept or reject each recommendation. Grading was based on the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system; the quality of the evidence was graded as high, moderate, or weak, and the strength of the recommendation was graded as strong or weak. Review of the document was performed by members of the SIS who were not on the task force. After responses were made to all critiques, the document was approved as an official guideline of the SIS by the Executive Council.

RESULTS

This guideline summarizes the current recommendations developed by the task force on the treatment of patients who have IAI. Evidence-based recommendations have been made regarding risk assessment in individual patients; source control; the timing, selection, and duration of antimicrobial therapy; and suggested approaches to patients who fail initial therapy. Additional recommendations related to the treatment of pediatric patients with IAI have been included.

SUMMARY

The current recommendations of the SIS regarding the treatment of patients with IAI are provided in this guideline.

Inclusion of Vancomycin as Part of Broad-Spectrum Coverage Does Not Improve Outcomes in Patients with Intra-Abdominal Infections: A Post Hoc Analysis

BACKGROUND

Management of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) includes broad-spectrum antimicrobial coverage and commonly includes vancomycin for the empiric coverage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Ideally, culture-guided de-escalation follows to promote robust antimicrobial stewardship. This study assessed the impact and necessity of vancomycin in cIAI treatment regimens.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A post hoc analysis of the Study to Optimize Peritoneal Infection Therapy (STOP-IT) trial was performed. Patients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam (P/T) and/or a carbapenem were included with categorization based on use of vancomycin. Univariate and multivariable analyses evaluated effects of including vancomycin on individual and the composite of undesirable outcomes (recurrent IAI, surgical site infection [SSI], or death).

RESULTS

The study cohort included 344 patients with 110 (32%) patients receiving vancomycin. Isolation of MRSA occurred in only eight (2.3%) patients. Vancomycin use was associated with a similar composite outcome, 29.1%, vs. no vancomycin, 22.2% (p = 0.17). Patients receiving vancomycin had (mean [standard deviation]) higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (13.1 [6.6] vs. 9.4 [5.7], p < 0.0001), extended length of stay (12.6 [10.2] vs. 8.6 [8.0] d, p < 0.001), and prolonged antibiotic courses (9.1 [8.0] vs. 7.1 [4.9] d, p = 0.02). After risk adjustment in a multivariate model, no significant difference existed for the measured outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis reveals that addition of vancomycin occurred in nearly one third of patients and more often in sicker patients. Despite this selection bias, no appreciable differences in undesired outcomes were demonstrated, suggesting limited utility for adding vancomycin to cIAI treatment regimens.

Aminoglycoside use in a pediatric hospital: there is room for improvement-a before/after study

Aminoglycoside prescriptions were rarely evaluated in children care facilities. Because of risk of toxicity, these narrow spectrum antibiotics are commonly misused. In this study, we evaluate aminoglycoside prescription and assess the impact of an information campaign on modalities of prescription and monitoring practices in a pediatric hospital. This prospective study, before/after diffusion of local recommendations, has been conducted over 6 months. All computerized prescriptions were analyzed. A semi-passive diffusion of local recommendations to prescribers allowed researchers to differentiate between a pre-intervention (P1) and post-intervention period (P2). Endpoints were the improvement of administered doses (mg/kg), modalities of administration, treatment duration, indications, and the presence of pharmacological monitoring. Three hundred and ten prescriptions were analyzed (P1 = 163, P2 = 147). Most common sites of infection treated were as follows: joint-bone (33 %), urinary tract (17 %) and intra-abdominal (15 %). Among all prescriptions, respectively, 12 and 13 % were avoidable. Short-duration treatment and single daily dosing seem to be widely achieved, but despite an improvement between the two periods, 45 % of prescribed doses in P2 were still below our recommendations (77 % in P1).

CONCLUSION

The semi-passive diffusion of recommendations has not improved significantly medical practices. Active diffusion with a regular monitoring could be useful to improve the use of aminoglycosides.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Misuse of aminoglycosides has been frequently described and evaluated in adult hospitals. • This misuse could be explained by their nephrotoxicity and their low therapeutic index. What is New: • Through this study, conducted in a pediatric hospital, we highlighted that practitioners misunderstand the aminoglycoside pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic targets and 12.3 % of aminoglycoside prescriptions could be avoided. • Finally, we showed that a semi-passive diffusion of local recommendations is not enough to improve aminoglycoside prescriptions.

Antimicrobials: a global alliance for optimizing their rational use in intra-abdominal infections (AGORA)

Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients. The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance. The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria. An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

Effect of initial empiric antibiotic therapy combined with control of the infection focus on the prognosis of patients with secondary peritonitis

BACKGROUND

In patients with intra-abdominal infection, inappropriate initial empiric antibiotic therapy is associated with greater morbidity. We evaluated the impact of adequate empiric antibiotic treatment together with control of the infection focus on the morbidity and mortality rates of patients with secondary peritonitis.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational study with the participation of 24 Spanish hospitals and 362 patients with secondary peritonitis (262 community-acquired, 100 post-operative). Therapeutic failure (infectious complications or death) was classified into four categories according to whether empiric antibiotic treatment was appropriate and the infection focus was controlled.

RESULTS

The rates of therapeutic failure, re-operation, and mortality were 48%, 13%, and 8%, respectively. Empiric antibiotic treatment was inappropriate in 39% of cases, which was associated with a higher rate of surgical site infection (53% vs. 40%; p=0.031) and death (12% vs. 5%; p=0.021) than was observed in patients receiving appropriate initial empiric therapy. Eight percent of patients in whom control of the infection focus was not obtained suffered from more infectious complications (76% vs. 52%; p=0.01) and surgical site infections (69% vs. 44%; p=0.01); and in this group, both therapeutic failure and mortality rates were similar, independent of whether the empiric antibiotic therapy was appropriate.

CONCLUSION

Inappropriate initial empiric antibiotic therapy was associated with higher rates of therapeutic failure, surgical site infection, re-operation, and death. Classification of therapeutic failure into four categories according to the appropriateness of empiric antibiotic therapy and the success of infection control provided excellent discrimination of morbidity and death.

Deviation from intention to treat analysis in randomised trials and treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether deviation from the standard intention to treat analysis has an influence on treatment effect estimates of randomised trials.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, via PubMed, searched between 2006 and 2010; 43 systematic reviews of interventions and 310 randomised trials were included.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

From each year searched, random selection of 5% of intervention reviews with a meta-analysis that included at least one trial that deviated from the standard intention to treat approach. Basic characteristics of the systematic reviews and randomised trials were extracted. Information on the reporting of intention to treat analysis, outcome data, risk of bias items, post-randomisation exclusions, and funding were extracted from each trial. Trials were classified as: ITT (reporting the standard intention to treat approach), mITT (reporting a deviation from the standard approach), and no ITT (reporting no approach). Within each meta-analysis, treatment effects were compared between mITT and ITT trials, and between mITT and no ITT trials. The ratio of odds ratios was calculated (value <1 indicated larger treatment effects in mITT trials than in other trial categories).

RESULTS

50 meta-analyses and 322 comparisons of randomised trials (from 84 ITT trials, 118 mITT trials, and 108 no ITT trials; 12 trials contributed twice to the analysis) were examined. Compared with ITT trials, mITT trials showed a larger intervention effect (pooled ratio of odds ratios 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.96), P=0.01; between meta-analyses variance τ(2)=0.13). Adjustments for sample size, type of centre, funding, items of risk of bias, post-randomisation exclusions, and variance of log odds ratio yielded consistent results (0.80 (0.69 to 0.94), P=0.005; τ(2)=0.08). After exclusion of five influential studies, results remained consistent (0.85 (0.75 to 0.98); τ(2)=0.08). The comparison between mITT trials and no ITT trials showed no statistical difference between the two groups (adjusted ratio of odds ratios 0.92 (0.70 to 1.23); τ(2)=0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Trials that deviated from the intention to treat analysis showed larger intervention effects than trials that reported the standard approach. Where an intention to treat analysis is impossible to perform, authors should clearly report who is included in the analysis and attempt to perform multiple imputations.

Guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections are one of the most common gastrointestinal emergencies and a leading cause of septic shock. A consensus conference on the management of community-acquired peritonitis was published in 2000. A new consensus as well as new guidelines for less common situations such as peritonitis in paediatrics and healthcare-associated infections had become necessary. The objectives of these Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) were therefore to define the medical and surgical management of community-acquired intra-abdominal infections, define the specificities of intra-abdominal infections in children and describe the management of healthcare-associated infections. The literature review was divided into six main themes: diagnostic approach, infection source control, microbiological data, paediatric specificities, medical treatment of peritonitis, and management of complications. The GRADE(®) methodology was applied to determine the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations. After summarising the work of the experts and application of the GRADE(®) method, 62 recommendations were formally defined by the organisation committee. Recommendations were then submitted to and amended by a review committee. After 2 rounds of Delphi scoring and various amendments, a strong agreement was obtained for 44 (100%) recommendations. The CPGs for peritonitis are therefore based on a consensus between the various disciplines involved in the management of these patients concerning a number of themes such as: diagnostic strategy and the place of imaging; time to management; the place of microbiological specimens; targets of empirical anti-infective therapy; duration of anti-infective therapy. The CPGs also specified the value and the place of certain practices such as: the place of laparoscopy; the indications for image-guided percutaneous drainage; indications for the treatment of enterococci and fungi. The CPGs also confirmed the futility of certain practices such as: the use of diagnostic biomarkers; systematic relaparotomies; prolonged anti-infective therapy, especially in children.

Shortening the course of antibiotic treatment in the intensive care unit

Effective antimicrobial stewardship is an increasingly important concern for healthcare providers globally. Antibiotics are frequently prescribed for patients who develop sepsis in the intensive care unit and traditionally courses are prolonged, with uncertain benefit and probable harm. There is little evidence to support many guidelines recommending between 10 and 14 days, and a number of studies suggest substantially shorter courses of less than 7 days may suffice. Safely reducing course length is likely to depend on a number of preconditions, including thorough eradication of any septic foci; optimization of serum antibiotic concentrations, particularly when there is physiological derangement; and use of novel biomarkers such as procalcitonin. The critical care environment is well suited to this aim as patients are closely monitored. With these measures in place, it is reasonable to believe short antibiotic courses can safely be used for the majority of intensive care infections.

Antibiotic stewardship in the intensive care unit

The rapid emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial-resistant microorganisms in ICUs worldwide constitute a problem of crisis dimensions. The root causes of this problem are multifactorial, but the core issues are clear. The emergence of antibiotic resistance is highly correlated with selective pressure resulting from inappropriate use of these drugs. Appropriate antibiotic stewardship in ICUs includes not only rapid identification and optimal treatment of bacterial infections in these critically ill patients, based on pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic characteristics, but also improving our ability to avoid administering unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotics, shortening the duration of their administration, and reducing the numbers of patients receiving undue antibiotic therapy. Either we will be able to implement such a policy or we and our patients will face an uncontrollable surge of very difficult-to-treat pathogens.

Beta lactam antibiotic monotherapy versus beta lactam-aminoglycoside antibiotic combination therapy for sepsis

BACKGROUND

Optimal antibiotic treatment for sepsis is imperative. Combining a beta lactam antibiotic with an aminoglycoside antibiotic may provide certain advantages over beta lactam monotherapy.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to compare beta lactam monotherapy versus beta lactam-aminoglycoside combination therapy in patients with sepsis and to estimate the rate of adverse effects with each treatment regimen, including the development of bacterial resistance to antibiotics.

SEARCH METHODS

In this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 11); MEDLINE (1966 to 4 November 2013); EMBASE (1980 to November 2013); LILACS (1982 to November 2013); and conference proceedings of the Interscience Conference of Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (1995 to 2013). We scanned citations of all identified studies and contacted all corresponding authors. In our previous review, we searched the databases to July 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized and quasi-randomized trials comparing any beta lactam monotherapy versus any combination of a beta lactam with an aminoglycoside for sepsis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included treatment failure, superinfections and adverse events. Two review authors independently collected data. We pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the fixed-effect model. We extracted outcomes by intention-to-treat analysis whenever possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 69 trials that randomly assigned 7863 participants. Twenty-two trials compared the same beta lactam in both study arms, while the remaining trials compared different beta lactams using a broader-spectrum beta lactam in the monotherapy arm. In trials comparing the same beta lactam, we observed no difference between study groups with regard to all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.30) and clinical failure (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29). In studies comparing different beta lactams, we observed a trend for benefit with monotherapy for all-cause mortality (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01) and a significant advantage for clinical failure (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.84). No significant disparities emerged from subgroup and sensitivity analyses, including assessment of participants with Gram-negative infection. The subgroup of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections was underpowered to examine effects. Results for mortality were classified as low quality of evidence mainly as the result of imprecision. Results for failure were classified as very low quality of evidence because of indirectness of the outcome and possible detection bias in non-blinded trials. We detected no differences in the rate of development of resistance. Nephrotoxicity was significantly less frequent with monotherapy (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.39). We found no heterogeneity for all these comparisons.We included a small subset of studies addressing participants with Gram-positive infection, mainly endocarditis. We identified no difference between monotherapy and combination therapy in these studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of an aminoglycoside to beta lactams for sepsis should be discouraged. All-cause mortality rates are unchanged. Combination treatment carries a significant risk of nephrotoxicity.

Antibiotic prescription patterns in the empiric therapy of severe sepsis: combination of antimicrobials with different mechanisms of action reduces mortality

Introduction

Although early institution of adequate antimicrobial therapy is lifesaving in sepsis patients, optimal antimicrobial strategy has not been established. Moreover, the benefit of combination therapy over monotherapy remains to be determined. Our aims are to describe patterns of empiric antimicrobial therapy in severe sepsis, assessing the impact of combination therapy, including antimicrobials with different mechanisms of action, on mortality.

Methods

This is a Spanish national multicenter study, analyzing all patients admitted to ICUs who received antibiotics within the first 6 hours of diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. Antibiotic-prescription patterns in community-acquired infections and nosocomial infections were analyzed separately and compared. We compared the impact on mortality of empiric antibiotic treatment, including antibiotics with different mechanisms of action, termed different-class combination therapy (DCCT), with that of monotherapy and any other combination therapy possibilities (non-DCCT).

Results

We included 1,372 patients, 1,022 (74.5%) of whom had community-acquired sepsis and 350 (25.5%) of whom had nosocomial sepsis. The most frequently prescribed antibiotic agents were β-lactams (902, 65.7%) and carbapenems (345, 25.1%). DCCT was administered to 388 patients (28.3%), whereas non-DCCT was administered to 984 (71.7%). The mortality rate was significantly lower in patients administered DCCTs than in those who were administered non-DCCTs (34% versus 40%; P = 0.042). The variables independently associated with mortality were age, male sex, APACHE II score, and community origin of the infection. DCCT was a protective factor against in-hospital mortality (odds ratio (OR), 0.699; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.522 to 0.936; P = 0.016), as was urologic focus of infection (OR, 0.241; 95% CI, 0.102 to 0.569; P = 0.001).

Conclusions

β-Lactams, including carbapenems, are the most frequently prescribed antibiotics in empiric therapy in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Administering a combination of antimicrobials with different mechanisms of action is associated with decreased mortality.

Combination therapy for treatment of infections with gram-negative bacteria

Combination antibiotic therapy for invasive infections with Gram-negative bacteria is employed in many health care facilities, especially for certain subgroups of patients, including those with neutropenia, those with infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, those with ventilator-associated pneumonia, and the severely ill. An argument can be made for empiric combination therapy, as we are witnessing a rise in infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative organisms. The wisdom of continued combination therapy after an organism is isolated and antimicrobial susceptibility data are known, however, is more controversial. The available evidence suggests that the greatest benefit of combination antibiotic therapy stems from the increased likelihood of choosing an effective agent during empiric therapy, rather than exploitation of in vitro synergy or the prevention of resistance during definitive treatment. In this review, we summarize the available data comparing monotherapy versus combination antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of infections with Gram-negative bacteria.

Antimicrobial susceptibility of gram-negative pathogens isolated from patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections in South African hospitals (SMART Study 2004-2009): impact of the new carbapenem breakpoints

BACKGROUND

The Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) follows trends in resistance among aerobic and facultative anaerobic gram-negative bacilli (GNB) isolated from complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) in patients around the world.

METHODS

During 2004-2009, three centralized clinical microbiology laboratories serving 59 private hospitals in three large South African cities collected 1,218 GNB from complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) and tested them for susceptibility to 12 antibiotics according to the 2011 Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines.

RESULTS

Enterobacteriaceae comprised 83.7% of the isolates. Escherichia coli was the species isolated most commonly (46.4%), and 7.6% of these were extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-positive. The highest ESBL rate was documented for Klebsiella pneumoniae (41.2%). Overall, ertapenem was the antibiotic most active against susceptible species for which it has breakpoints (94.6%) followed by amikacin (91.9%), piperacillin-tazobactam (89.3%), and imipenem-cilastatin (87.1%), whereas rates of resistance to ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, ciprofloxacin, and levofloxacin were documented to be 29.7%, 28.7%, 22.5%, and 21.1%, respectively. Multi-drug resistance (MDR), defined as resistance to three or more antibiotic classes, was significantly more common in K. pneumoniae (27.9%) than in E. coli (4.9%; p<0.0001) or Proteus mirabilis (4.1%; p<0.05). Applying the new CLSI breakpoints for carbapenems, susceptibility to ertapenem was reduced significantly in ESBL-positive E. coli compared with ESBL-negative isolates (91% vs. 98%; p<0.05), but this did not apply to imipenem-cilastatin (95% vs. 99%; p=0.0928). A large disparity between imipenem-cilastatin and ertapenem susceptibility in P. mirabilis and Morganella morganii was documented (24% vs. 96% and 15% vs. 92%, respectively), as most isolates of these two species had imipenem-cilastatin minimum inhibitory concentrations in the 2-4 mcg/mL range, which is no longer regarded as susceptible.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documented substantial resistance to standard antimicrobial therapy among GNB commonly isolated from cIAIs in South Africa. With the application of the new CLSI carbapenem breakpoints, discrepancies were noted between ertapenem and imipenem-cilastatin with regard to the changes in their individual susceptibilities. Longitudinal surveillance of susceptibility patterns is useful to guide recommendations for empiric antibiotic use in cIAIs.

An information campaign on aminoglycosides use during septic shock failed to improve the quality of care

BACKGROUND

Septic shock remains a major cause of death in intensive care units (ICU) and an inappropriate antibiotic regimen worsens the prognosis. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of an information campaign on modalities of prescription of aminoglycosides in septic shock.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

METHODS

Consecutive septic shock patients admitted to the surgical ICU over a 2-year period were included. An information campaign allowed to differentiate between a pre- (P1) and a post- (P2) interventional period. The campaign clarified the rules and requirements for pharmacological monitoring of aminoglycosides. The main objective was to increase the rate of prescription of peak serum aminoglycoside following the first intravenous injection.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-eight patients (P1=76 and P2=72) were finally included into the study. Similar clinical characteristics were observed during both periods. The rate of prescription of peak serum aminoglycoside following the first injection was performed in 49% (P1) versus 65% (P2), P=0.09. The length of stay in ICU was 16 days [extremes: 1-74] (P1) versus 17 days [extremes: 1-133] (P2) (P=0.84). Inhospital mortality was 28% (P1) versus 26% (P2), P=0.86.

CONCLUSIONS

An information campaign describing the modalities of prescription of aminoglycosides in septic shock failed to improve medical practices and patient outcomes. A mobile team of antibiotics could be useful in daily practice.

Are enterococci playing a role in postoperative peritonitis in critically ill patients?

This prospective non-interventional study is aimed at evaluating the role of enterococci in the postoperative course of postoperative peritonitis (POP) and the predictive factors for isolating Enterococcus spp. All adult patients, hospitalized in intensive care, who had POP between September 2006 and February 2010 were analysed. The patients' baseline clinical characteristics and microbiological and surgical characteristics of the first episode of POP were recorded. The rates of surgical and non-surgical complications and mortality were studied. A total of 139 patients were analysed and Enterococcus spp. were recovered in 61 patients (43%). The presence of enterococci was associated with significantly more intra-abdominal abscesses (26% vs 12%, p=0.025), but did not affect the rate of reoperation or mortality. Antibiotic use before reoperation was the only independent predictive factor for isolating enterococci (OR=2.19, CI95%: 1.02-4.70, p<0.043). Although mortality was not affected by the presence of Enterococcus spp., a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess was found, suggesting that enterococci play a significant role in postoperative peritonitis, but the need to treat them remains to be determined. Previous antibiotic use before reoperation was a key factor in predicting the subsequent recovery of enterococci.

Antimicrobial therapy of sepsis and septic shock--when are two drugs better than one?

In clinical practice, physicians frequently use combination therapy despite the conflicting evidence for its effectiveness. The results of recent studies have contributed to our understanding of this important issue. In this article, we examine the evidence for, or against, the use of combination drug therapy compared with monotherapy in the management of serious infections, sepsis, and septic shock.

Enterococci increase the morbidity and mortality associated with severe intra-abdominal infections in elderly patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVES

Enterococci may increase morbidity and mortality in elderly patients with intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single-centre, retrospective evaluation of an ICU database (1997-2007) of elderly ICU patients (≥75 years) with a severe IAI was performed. Demographics, severity scores, underlying diseases, microbiology and outcomes were recorded. Patients with enterococci isolated in peritoneal fluid (E+ group) were compared with those lacking enterococci in peritoneal fluid (E- group). Stepwise multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty patients were included (mean ± SD age 82 ± 5 years; n = 72 in the E+ group). The E+ group was more severely ill than the E- group, with higher Simplified Acute Physiologic Score 2 (61 ± 20 versus 48 ± 16, P = 0.0001) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (8 ± 3 versus 5 ± 3, P = 0.0001), a greater postoperative infection rate (58.3% versus 34.1%, P = 0.01), a higher incidence of inappropriate empirical antimicrobial therapies (33.3% versus 19.3%, P = 0.04), a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (11.8 ± 10.9 versus 7.8 ± 10.2 days, P = 0.02) and greater vasopressor use (7.2 ± 7.1 versus 3.3 ± 4.1 days, P = 0.001). ICU mortality was higher in the E+ group than in the E- group (54.2% versus 38.6%, P = 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, E+ status was independently associated with mortality (odds ratio 2.24; 95% confidence interval 1.06-4.75; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In severely ill, elderly patients in the ICU for an IAI, the isolation of enterococci was associated with increased disease severity and morbidity and was an independent risk factor for mortality.

Overview of antimicrobial therapy in intensive care units

In the management of a patient with severe sepsis, it is important to suspect the infection early, to collect samples immediately after diagnosis and to promptly initiate a broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment. The choice of this empirical antimicrobial therapy should be based on host characteristics, site of infection, local ecology and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of antibiotics. In severe infection, guidelines recommend the use of a combination of antibiotics. After results of cultures are obtained, treatment should be re-evaluated to either de-escalate or escalate the antibiotic prescription. This is associated with optimal costs, decreased incidence of superinfection and minimal development of antimicrobial resistance. All these steps should rely on written protocols, and the compliance to these protocols should be continuously monitored in order to detect violations and implement corrective procedures.

[What should and should not be covered in intraabdominal infection]

Despite improvements in our knowledge of the physiopathology of severe infection, diagnostic methods, antibiotic therapy, postoperative care and surgical techniques, a substantial number of patients with intraabdominal infection (IAI) will develop advanced stages of septic insult requiring admission to the intensive care unit. The success of treatment of IAI is multifactorial and the best antibiotic protocol may be insufficient unless adequate control of the focus of infection has been achieved. The present article discusses the appropriacy of empirical antibiotic therapy and the main pathogens associated with treatment failure. We also analyze the patients at risk of infection with microorganisms requiring broad-spectrum antimicrobial coverage. However, excessive antibiotic treatment, in terms of either spectrum or duration, could jeopardize future patients in an environment already threatened by the scarcity of research and development into new molecules required for the emergence of pathogens resistant to current antibiotics.

A survival benefit of combination antibiotic therapy for serious infections associated with sepsis and septic shock is contingent only on the risk of death: a meta-analytic/meta-regression study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a potential benefit with combination antibiotic therapy is restricted to the most critically ill subset of patients, particularly those with septic shock.

DATA SOURCES

OVID MEDLINE (1950-October 2009), EMBASE (1980-October 2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to third quarter 2009), the ClinicalTrial.gov database, and the SCOPUS database.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized or observational studies of antimicrobial therapy of serious bacterial infections potentially associated with sepsis or septic shock. Fifty studies met entry criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study design, mortality/clinical response, and other variables were extracted independently by two reviewers. When possible, study datasets were split into mutually exclusive groups with and without shock or critical illness.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Although a pooled odds ratio indicated no overall mortality/clinical response benefit with combination therapy (odds ratio, 0.856; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.03; p = .0943; I = 45.1%), stratification of datasets by monotherapy mortality risk demonstrated substantial benefit in the most severely ill subset (monotherapy risk of death >25%; odds ratio of death, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.64; I = 8.6%). Of those datasets that could be stratified by the presence of shock/critical illness, the more severely ill group consistently demonstrated increased efficacy of a combination therapy strategy (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.70; p < .0001; I = 0%). An increased risk of death was found in low-risk patients (risk of death <or=15% in the monotherapy arm) exposed to combination therapy (odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-2.03; p = .003; I = 8.2%). Meta-regression indicated that efficacy of combination therapy was dependent only on the risk of death in the monotherapy group.

CONCLUSION

Combination antibiotic therapy improves survival and clinical response of high-risk, life-threatening infections, particularly those associated with septic shock but may be detrimental to low-risk patients.

[Tigecycline for treatment of severe infections in intensive care: a drug use evaluation]

OBJECTIVES

To report our experience of tigecycline use in a medical and surgical intensive care unit. To describe its prescription, microbiology findings, tolerance and efficacy.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, observational, single center study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients treated with tigecycline were included. Demography, indication of treatment, bacteriology before, during and in the month after treatment and ICU mortality were collected. The main endpoints were clinical and microbiological efficacy and tolerance.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were included. In half of the cases, tigecycline was prescribed in monotherapy for a complicated intra-abdominal infection. Overall tolerance of tigecycline was good. Clinical and microbiological cure was obtained in six cases, not obtained in nine, indeterminate in six cases and not evaluable in the three cases of prophylaxis. During the treatment, four bacteria commonly sensitives were shown to be resistant to tigecycline.

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study on 24 patients suggests that tigecycline is well tolerated in critically ill patients. Clinical cure in severe infections was compromised in nine patients essentially because of resistant pathogens suggesting its prescription on antibiogram. However, the impact of association or the increasing doses in severe critically ill patients should be evaluated.

Risk factors for multidrug resistant bacteria and optimization of empirical antibiotic therapy in postoperative peritonitis

Introduction

The main objective was to determine risk factors for presence of multidrug resistant bacteria (MDR) in postoperative peritonitis (PP) and optimal empirical antibiotic therapy (EA) among options proposed by Infectious Disease Society of America and the Surgical Infection Society guidelines.

Methods

One hundred patients hospitalised in the intensive care unit (ICU) for PP were reviewed. Clinical and microbiologic data, EA and its adequacy were analysed. The in vitro activities of 9 antibiotics in relation to the cultured bacteria were assessed to propose the most adequate EA among 17 regimens in the largest number of cases.

Results

A total of 269 bacteria was cultured in 100 patients including 41 episodes with MDR. According to logistic regression analysis, the use of broad-spectrum antibiotic between initial intervention and reoperation was the only significant risk factor for emergence of MDR bacteria (odds ratio (OR) = 5.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.7 - 15; P = 0.0031). Antibiotics providing the best activity rate were imipenem/cilastatin (68%) and piperacillin/tazobactam (53%). The best adequacy for EA was obtained by combinations of imipenem/cilastatin or piperacillin/tazobactam, amikacin and a glycopeptide, with values reaching 99% and 94%, respectively. Imipenem/cilastin was the only single-drug regimen providing an adequacy superior to 80% in the absence of broad spectrum antibiotic between initial surgery and reoperation.

Conclusions

Interval antibiotic therapy is associated with the presence of MDR bacteria. Not all regimens proposed by Infectious Disease Society of America and the Surgical Infection Society guidelines for PP can provide an acceptable rate of adequacy. Monotherapy with imipenem/cilastin is suitable for EA only in absence of this risk factor for MDR. For other patients, only antibiotic combinations may achieve high adequacy rates.

Risk factors for multidrug-resistant bacteria in patients with post-operative peritonitis requiring intensive care

OBJECTIVES

This prospective non-interventional study investigated the risk factors for multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB) in patients with post-operative peritonitis (POP), to provide guidance for empirical antimicrobial therapy.

METHODS

All consecutive patients, >15 years old, admitted to a surgical intensive care unit (ICU) between September 2006 and January 2009 for a first episode of POP were included. Antibiotic susceptibilities of microorganisms recovered from blood cultures and peritoneal fluid were determined by disc diffusion. Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ticarcillin/clavulanic acid, piperacillin/tazobactam, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, cefepime, imipenem, gentamicin, amikacin and ciprofloxacin were tested against Gram-negative bacteria, and oxacillin, amoxicillin, vancomycin, gentamicin and erythromycin were tested against aerobic Gram-positive bacteria. Results were reported as susceptible or resistant.

RESULTS

MDRB were isolated from 20/115 (17%) patients. In univariate analysis, use of antimicrobial therapy during the 3 months prior to hospitalization and a long duration between hospital admission or first operation and relaparotomy were significantly associated with MDRB recovery. In multivariate analysis, only antimicrobial treatment in the 3 months preceding hospitalization and duration between first operation and relaparotomy were independent risk factors for MDRB [odds ratio (OR) = 5.80, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 1.99-16.91 and OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.02-1.19, respectively]. No MDRB were found when the delay between the first operation and relaparotomy was <5 days. POP severity, non-surgical and surgical complications, hospital and ICU length of stay, and mortality were similar in patients with and without MDRB.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that broad-spectrum antibiotics should be used in ICU patients with POP who have received antimicrobial therapy in the 3 months prior to hospitalization, or with >5 days between the first operation and relaparotomy.

Epidemiology, management, and prognosis of secondary non-postoperative peritonitis: a French prospective observational multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in treatment, secondary peritonitis still is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Better knowledge of real-life clinical practice might improve management.

METHODS

Prospective, observational study (January-June 2005) of 841 patients with non-postoperative secondary peritonitis.

RESULTS

Peritonitis originated in the colon (32% of patients), appendix (31%), stomach/duodenum (18%), small bowel (13%), or biliary tract (6%). Most patients (78%) presented with generalized peritonitis and 26% with severe peritonitis (Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II score>38). Among the 841 patients, 27.3% underwent laparoscopy alone; 11% underwent repeat surgery, percutaneous drainage, or both. A SAPS II score>38 and the presence of Enterococcus spp. were predictive of abdominal and non-surgical infections (odds ratio [OR]=1.84; p=0.013 and OR=2.93; p<0.0001, respectively). A SAPS II score>38 also was predictive of death (OR=10.5; p<0.0001). The overall mortality rate was high (15%). Patients receiving inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy had significantly higher morbidity and mortality rates than patients receiving appropriate therapy (44 vs. 30%; p=0.004 and 23% vs. 14%; p=0.015, respectively). The SAPS II score and rates of severe peritonitis, morbidity, and mortality were significantly lower in patients with appendiceal peritonitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with non-postoperative peritonitis should be considered high risk and should receive appropriate initial therapy. The presence of Enterococcus spp. in peritoneal cultures significantly increased morbidity but not the mortality rate. Appendiceal peritonitis that was less severe and had a better prognosis than peritonitis originating in other sites should be considered a special case in future studies.

Moxifloxacin for the treatment of patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections (the AIDA Study)

This prospective, randomized, open, international, multicenter study of adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) compared the efficacy and safety of sequential intravenous (i.v.) to oral (p.o.) moxifloxacin 400 mg once daily, with that of i.v. ceftriaxone 2 g once daily, plus metronidazole 500 mg three times daily, followed by p.o. amoxicillin/clavulanate 625 mg three times daily. The primary efficacy variable was clinical cure at test of cure (TOC) (day 28-42 after study entry) in the per protocol (PP) population. Of 595 patients in the study, 511 patients were valid for PP analysis (246 moxifloxacin, 265 ceftriaxone/metronidazole). Sequential moxifloxacin was noninferior to the comparator regimen--clinical cure rates at TOC were 80.9% versus 82.3% (moxifloxacin versus ceftriaxone/metronidazole; 95% CI -8.9, 4.2%). The incidence of adverse events was comparable between the two treatment groups. Therefore, sequential moxifloxacin monotherapy is as effective and safe as combination therapy with i.v. ceftriaxone plus i.v. metronidazole followed by oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for the treatment of cIAI.

Factors associated with septic shock and mortality in generalized peritonitis: comparison between community-acquired and postoperative peritonitis

Introduction

The risk factors associated with poor outcome in generalized peritonitis are still debated. Our aim was to analyze clinical and bacteriological factors associated with the occurrence of shock and mortality in patients with secondary generalized peritonitis.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study involving 180 consecutive patients with secondary generalized peritonitis (community-acquired and postoperative) at a single center. We recorded peri-operative occurrence of septic shock and 30-day survival rate and analyzed their associations with patients characteristics (age, gender, SAPS II, liver cirrhosis, cancer, origin of peritonitis), and microbiological/mycological data (peritoneal fluid, blood cultures).

Results

Frequency of septic shock was 41% and overall mortality rate was 19% in our cohort. Patients with septic shock had a mortality rate of 35%, versus 8% for patients without shock. Septic shock occurrence and mortality rate were not different between community-acquired and postoperative peritonitis. Age over 65, two or more microorganisms, or anaerobes in peritoneal fluid culture were independent risk factors of shock. In the subgroup of peritonitis with septic shock, biliary origin was independently associated with increased mortality. In addition, intraperitoneal yeasts and Enterococci were associated with septic shock in community-acquired peritonitis. Yeasts in the peritoneal fluid of postoperative peritonitis were also an independent risk factor of death in patients with septic shock.

Conclusions

Unlike previous studies, we observed no difference in incidence of shock and prognosis between community-acquired and postoperative peritonitis. Our findings support the deleterious role of Enterococcus species and yeasts in peritoneal fluid, reinforcing the need for prospective trials evaluating systematic treatment against these microorganisms in patients with secondary peritonitis.

Clinical and microbiological profiles of community-acquired and nosocomial intra-abdominal infections: results of the French prospective, observational EBIIA study

OBJECTIVES

The EBIIA (Etude épidémiologique Bactério-clinique des Infections Intra-Abdominales) study was designed to describe the clinical, microbiological and resistance profiles of community-acquired and nosocomial intra-abdominal infections (IAIs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January to July 2005, patients undergoing surgery/interventional drainage for IAIs with a positive microbiological culture were included by 25 French centres. The primary endpoint was the epidemiology of the microorganisms and their resistance to antibiotics. Multivariate analysis was carried out using stepwise logistic regression to assess the factors predictive of death during hospitalization.

RESULTS

Three hundred and thirty-one patients (234 community-acquired and 97 nosocomial) were included. The distribution of the microorganisms differed according to the type of infection. Carbapenems and amikacin were the most active agents in vitro against Enterobacteriaceae in both community-acquired and nosocomial infections. Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, amikacin, imipenem, ceftazidime and ciprofloxacin were the most active agents in community-acquired infections, while imipenem, cefepime and amikacin were the most active in nosocomial cases. Against the Gram-positive bacteria, vancomycin and teicoplanin were the most active in both infections. Against anaerobic bacteria, the most active agents were metronidazole and carbapenems in both groups. Empirical antibiotic therapy adequately targeted the pathogens for 63% of community-acquired and 64% of nosocomial peritonitis. The presence of one or more co-morbidities [odds ratio (OR) = 3.17; P = 0.007], one or more severity criteria (OR = 4.90; P < 0.001) and generalized peritonitis (OR = 3.17; P = 0.006) were predictive of death.

CONCLUSIONS

The principal results of EBIIA are a higher diversity of microorganisms isolated in nosocomial infections and decreased susceptibility among these strains. Despite this, the adequacy of treatment is comparable in the two groups.

Incidence and impact on clinical outcome of infections with piperacillin/tazobactam resistant Escherichia coli in ICU: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Escherichia coli infections are frequent in ICU patients. The increased resistance to fluoroquinolones and amoxicillin/clavulanate of this pathogen mandates the prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics such as piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP-TAZ) or third generation cephalosporins (3GC).

METHODS

To assess incidence and impact on clinical outcome of infections with PIP-TAZ resistant E. coli in ICU patients, we conducted a retrospective cohort study with infections due to PIP-TAZ resistant (PIP-TAZ R) or to PIP-TAZ susceptible strains (PIP-TAZ S) between 1 January 2002 and 30 June 2004.

RESULTS

Of 83 strains, 13 were PIP-TAZ R: 2 strains produced an extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (2%), 11 produced a high level penicillinase (13%). Prior amoxicillin or amoxicillin/clavulanate prescription was reported in 7 cases (54%) of infections with PIP-TAZ R isolates and in 15 cases (21%) of infections with PIP-TAZ S isolates (p = 0.03). Time of onset of the infection from hospital admission was longer in case of infections with PIP-TAZ R than with PIP-TAZ S isolates (22 +/- 32 vs 10 +/- 21 days, p = 0.01). The overall ICU mortality rate was 38%. Mortality and length of stay in ICU were similar in case of infections with PIP-TAZ R isolates and with PIP-TAZ S isolates.

CONCLUSION

Infections with PIP-TAZ R E. coli are frequent in ICU patients. No prognostic impact of this pattern of resistance was found. Prescription of PIP-TAZ for empirical treatment of E. coli infections in ICU however exposes to inappropriate therapy.

[Bacterial cultures and empirical antimicrobial therapy for community-acquired secondary peritonitis]

Surgeons and anesthetists are frequently confronted with community-acquired secondary peritonitis. We summarize literature results and consensus conferences concerning the types of bacteriologic sampling and cultures and the empiric choice of an antibiotic regimen based on the probable pathogens encountered in community-acquired secondary peritonitis. These studies leave some doubt as to the necessity for routine blood cultures and the need for anaerobic cultures of peritoneal fluid. No one disputes the need for broad spectrum antibiotic therapy, but there is no consensus regarding one, two, or three drug antibiotic regimens or whether an aminoglycoside is an essential part of the recipe. Duration of antibiotic therapy is still a subject of controversy with recommendations varying from 24 hours to 10 days. The need for antibiotics with activity against enterococcus and the need for systematic antifungal therapy when fungal growth is noted in the peritoneal fluid remain undefined. These uncertainties underline the need for treating physicians within each establishment to elaborate a written consensus of antibiotic therapy.

Antibiotic Prescribing in Critical Care: Specific Indications

This article outlines recommendations for the treatment of specific infections occurring in the setting of critical care. In the interests of brevity, a limited number of infections are discussed and recommendations are largely confined to empirical therapy. Basic principles of diagnosis and treatment apply in all cases, including appropriate de-escalation when an organism is identified. These aspects of treatment have been dealt with in part one of this article – ‘Antibiotic prescribing in critical care: general principles' published in the winter 2007 edition of JICS.

Antimicrobial treatment for intra-abdominal infections

Treatment of patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections involves antimicrobial therapy, generally in conjunction with an interventional procedure to control the source of the infection. Antimicrobial regimens effective against common gram-negative and anaerobic enteric pathogens are the mainstay of therapy. For patients with community-acquired intra-abdominal infections, efficacy is comparable among the various single-agent or combination regimens recommended for therapy. Narrower-spectrum antimicrobial agents with a low potential for iatrogenic complications are appropriate for these patients. Patients with nosocomially-acquired, intra-abdominal infections are more likely to harbor resistant pathogens. Inadequate empiric antimicrobial therapy is associated with treatment failure and death. Therefore, broader spectrum antimicrobial regimens are recommended for these patients. In addition to coverage of more resistant gram-negative bacilli and anaerobes, use of agents effective against enterococci, resistant staphylococci and Candida should be considered. De-escalation of an initially broad antimicrobial regimen should be undertaken once definitive culture results are available.

Piperacillin-tazobactam: a beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combination

Piperacillin-tazobactam is a beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combination with a broad spectrum of antibacterial activity that includes Gram-positive and -negative aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Piperacillin-tazobactam retains its in vitro activity against broad-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and some extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae, but not against isolates of Gram-negative bacilli harboring AmpC beta-lactamases. Piperacillin-tazobactam has recently been reformulated to include ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and sodium citrate; this new formulation has been shown to be compatible in vitro with the two aminoglycosides, gentamicin and amikacin, allowing for simultaneous Y-site infusion, but not with tobramycin. Multicenter, randomized, double-blinded clinical trials have demonstrated piperacillin-tazobactam to be as clinically effective as relevant comparator antibiotics. Clinical trials have demonstrated piperacillin-tazobactam to be effective for the treatment of patients with intra-abdominal infections, skin and soft tissue infections, lower respiratory tract infections, complicated urinary tract infections, gynecological infections and more recently, febrile neutropenia. Piperacillin-tazobactam has an excellent safety and tolerability profile and continues to be a reliable option for the empiric treatment of moderate-to-severe infections in hospitalized patients.

The empiric treatment of nosocomial intra-abdominal infections

The treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections continues to challenge physicians, primarily because of the polymicrobial nature of these infections coupled with the high risk of complications and even death among the more severe patients. The initial selection of antimicrobial therapy for treatment of nosocomial intraabdominal infections is extremely important because an association has been shown between inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy and delayed clinical resolution, increased length of hospital stay, and an increased risk of mortality. Moreover, it is becoming more frequent for isolates recovered from patients to possess multiple resistance factors (e.g., extended-spectrum beta-lactamases [ESBLs], vancomycin-resistant enterococci [VRE]). Therefore, when selecting empiric antimicrobial therapy, the physician must consider the likelihood of encountering one of these difficult-to-treat isolates and select an agent or agents with anticipated activity against such organisms. Here, we discuss the merits and limitations of empiric therapy for nosocomial intra-abdominal infections, review the current guidelines for treatment, and discuss the therapeutic options currently available.

Factors associated with multidrug-resistant bacteria in secondary peritonitis: impact on antibiotic therapy

Secondary peritonitis includes community-acquired and nosocomial peritonitis. These intra-abdominal infections have a common pathogenesis but some microbiological differences, particularly with respect to the type of bacteria recovered and the level of antimicrobial susceptibility. This report describes a prospective observational study of 93 consecutive patients with secondary peritonitis during an 11-month period. Community-acquired peritonitis accounted for 44 cases and nosocomial peritonitis for 49 cases (post-operative in 35 cases). Fifteen multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria were recovered from 14 patients. In univariate analysis, the presence of MDR bacteria was associated significantly with pre-operative and total hospital lengths of stay, previous use of antimicrobial therapy, and post-operative antimicrobial therapy duration and modifications. A 5-day cut-off in length of hospital stay had the best specificity (58%) and sensitivity (93%) for predicting whether MDR bacteria were present. In multivariate analysis, only a composite variable associating pre-operative hospital length of stay and previous use of antimicrobial therapy was a significant independent risk-factor for infection with MDR bacteria. In conclusion, knowledge of these two factors may provide a more rational basis for selecting initial antimicrobial therapy for patients with secondary peritonitis.

Decision-Making Analysis for Selection of Antibiotic Treatment in Intra-Abdominal Infection Using Preference Measurements

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial therapy of abdominal infections is important to the prognosis of affected patients. The choice of antimicrobial therapy must consider effectiveness, safety, cost, and antibiotic resistance, among numerous factors. However, in reality, decisions are made assuming bioequivalence between regimens, without considering the specific attributes of any particular regimen. The objective was to determine the best antibiotic regimen for patients with community-acquired abdominal infection on the basis of a decision analysis that included effectiveness as well as safety, measured as adverse effects.

METHODS

A decision tree was built using information from a systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of antimicrobial regimens tested in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and the frequency and severity of adverse effects. The quality of the articles was assessed with the Oxford criteria for RCTs. The main outcome was preferences reported by surgeons, measured on a numeric scale. Preferences were obtained using a standard survey that reported each adverse effect with its respective intensity, reversibility, sequelae, duration of symptoms, and necessity for change of antibiotic. Each of the surgeons had to assign a value blindly from 0 to 10, where 10 was the most severe. A sensitivity analysis was conducted varying the frequency of adverse effects.

RESULTS

The regimens analyzed were amikacin-metronidazole, amikacin-clindamycin, ciprofloxacin-metronidazole, ampicillin-sulbactam, ceftriaxone-metronidazole, piperacillin-tazobactam, and ertapenem. The perceived severity of adverse effects reported were: Acute neuromuscular blockade (8.0), severe allergic reaction (7.5), ototoxicity (7.4), nephrotoxicity (7.1), antibiotic-associated colitis (7.0), peripheral neuropathy (5.3), general neurological symptoms (4.9), gastrointestinal symptoms (3.1), and other general symptoms (2.6). Favored regimens were ceftriaxone-metronidazole (1.15), ampicillin-sulbactam (1.24), piperacillin-tazobactam (1.27) and ertapenem (1.28). These strategies dominated the other therapeutic schemes. Sensitivity analysis showed no changes in the dominance reported when the frequency of adverse effects was maintained in the known clinical range.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic regimens that contain aminoglycosides are not bioequivalent to those without aminoglycosides when effectiveness and adverse effects are considered simultaneously. Antibiotic regimens that do not use aminoglycosides must be the first line of treatment for abdominal sepsis acquired in the community.

The Surgical Infection Society guidelines on antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections: an executive summary

The Surgical Infection Society last published guidelines on antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections in 1992 (Bohnen JMA, et al., Arch Surg 1992;127:83-89). Since then, an appreciable body of literature has been published on this subject. Therefore, the Therapeutics Agents Committee of the Society undertook an effort to update the previous guidelines, primarily using data published over the past decade. An additional goal of the Committee was to characterize its recommendations according to contemporary principles of evidence-based medicine. To develop these guidelines, the Committee carried out a systematic search for all English language articles published between 1990 and 2000 related to antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections. This literature was reviewed individually and collectively by the Committee, and categorized according to the type of study and its quality. Additional articles published prior to 1990 were also utilized when necessary. By a process of iterative consensus, the Committee developed provisional guidelines for antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections based on this evidence. Following extensive review by members of the Society, these guidelines were approved for publication in final form by the Council of the Surgical Infection Society. This executive summary delineates the Society's current recommendations for antimicrobial therapy of patients with intra-abdominal infections. Topics discussed include the selection of patients needing therapeutic antimicrobials, duration of antimicrobial therapy, acceptable antimicrobial regimens, and identification and treatment of higher-risk patients. Guidelines for patient selection and specific antimicrobial regimens were based on relatively good evidence, but those regarding optimal duration of therapy and treatment of higher-risk patients relied mostly on expert opinion, since there was a paucity of high-quality studies on those issues. Relevant areas for future investigation include the safety, convenience, and cost-effectiveness of available antimicrobial regimens for lower-risk patients, and better means for identifying and treating higher-risk patients with intra-abdominal infections.

The Surgical Infection Society guidelines on antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections: evidence for the recommendations

Revised guidelines for the use of antimicrobial therapy in patients with intra-abdominal infections were recently developed by the Therapeutic Agents Committee of the Surgical Infection Society (Mazuski et al., Surg Infect 2002;3:161-173). These were based, insofar as possible, on evidence published over the past decade. The objective of this document is to describe the process by which the Committee identified and reviewed the published literature utilized to develop the recommendations and to summarize the results of those reviews. English-language articles published between 1990 and 2000 related to antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections were identified by a systematic MEDLINE search and an examination of references included in recent review articles. If current literature with regard to a specific issue was lacking, relevant articles published prior to 1990 were identified. All prospective randomized controlled trials, as well as other articles selected by the Committee, were evaluated individually and collectively. Data with regard to patient numbers, types of infections, and results of interventions were abstracted. Studies were categorized according to their design, and all included trials were graded according to quality. On the basis of this evidence, the Committee formulated recommendations for antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections and graded those recommendations. After receiving comments from invited reviewers and the general membership of the Society, the guidelines were finalized and submitted to the Council of the Surgical Infection Society for approval. The final recommendations related to the selection of patients needing therapeutic antimicrobials, acceptable antimicrobial regimens, duration of antimicrobial use, and the identification and treatment of higher-risk patients. Although numerous publications pertaining to these topics were identified, but nearly all of the prospective randomized controlled trials represented comparisons of different antimicrobial regimens for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. A few prospective trials evaluated the need for therapeutic antimicrobial therapy in patients with peritoneal contamination following abdominal trauma. The quality of these prospective trials was highly variable. Many did not limit enrollment to patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections, lacked blinding of treatment assignment, did not provide a complete description of the criteria used to determine therapeutic success or failure, failed to identify the reasons why patients were excluded from analysis, or did not include an intention-to-treat analysis. For many issues, no prospective randomized controlled trials were encountered, and guidelines had to be formulated using evidence from studies with historical controls or uncontrolled data, or on the basis of expert opinion