Dataset Information

Evaluation of a Mixing versus a Cycling Strategy of Antibiotic Use in Critically-Ill Medical Patients: Impact on Acquisition of Resistant Microorganisms and Clinical Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the effect of two strategies of antibiotic use (mixing vs. cycling) on the acquisition of resistant microorganisms, infections and other clinical outcomes.

Methods

Prospective cohort study in an 8-bed intensive care unit during 35- months in which a mixing-cycling policy of antipseudomonal beta-lactams (meropenem, ceftazidime/piperacillin-tazobactam) and fluoroquinolones was operative. Nasopharyngeal and rectal swabs and respiratory secretions were obtained within 48h of admission and thrice weekly thereafter. Target microorganisms included methicillin-resistant S. aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and non-fermenters.

Results

A total of 409 (42%) patients were included in mixing and 560 (58%) in cycling. Exposure to ceftazidime/piperacillin-tazobactam and fluoroquinolones was significantly higher in mixing while exposure to meropenem was higher in cycling, although overall use of antipseudomonals was not significantly different (37.5/100 patient-days vs. 38.1/100 patient-days). There was a barely higher acquisition rate of microorganisms during mixing, but this difference lost its significance when the cases due to an exogenous Burkholderia cepacia outbreak were excluded (19.3% vs. 15.4%, OR 0.8, CI 0.5-1.1). Acquisition of Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistant to the intervention antibiotics or with multiple-drug resistance was similar. There were no significant differences between mixing and cycling in the proportion of patients acquiring any infection (16.6% vs. 14.5%, OR 0.9, CI 0.6-1.2), any infection due to target microorganisms (5.9% vs. 5.2%, OR 0.9, CI 0.5-1.5), length of stay (median 5 d for both groups) or mortality (13.9 vs. 14.3%, OR 1.03, CI 0.7-1.3).

Conclusions

A cycling strategy of antibiotic use with a 6-week cycle duration is similar to mixing in terms of acquisition of resistant microorganisms, infections, length of stay and mortality.

SUBMITTER: Cobos-Trigueros N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4794237 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of a Mixing versus a Cycling Strategy of Antibiotic Use in Critically-Ill Medical Patients: Impact on Acquisition of Resistant Microorganisms and Clinical Outcomes.

Cobos-Trigueros Nazaret N Solé Mar M Castro Pedro P Torres Jorge Luis JL Rinaudo Mariano M De Lazzari Elisa E Morata Laura L Hernández Cristina C Fernández Sara S Soriano Alex A Nicolás José María JM Mensa Josep J Vila Jordi J Martínez José Antonio JA

PloS one 20160316 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the effect of two strategies of antibiotic use (mixing vs. cycling) on the acquisition of resistant microorganisms, infections and other clinical outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>Prospective cohort study in an 8-bed intensive care unit during 35- months in which a mixing-cycling policy of antipseudomonal beta-lactams (meropenem, ceftazidime/piperacillin-tazobactam) and fluoroquinolones was operative. Nasopharyngeal and rectal swabs and respiratory secretions were obtained wi ...[more]

PMID: 26982807

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRepeated rotation of empiric antibiotic treatment strategies is hypothesized to reduce antibiotic resistance. Clinical rotation studies failed to change unit-wide prevalence of antibiotic resistant bacteria (ARB) carriage, including an international cluster-randomized crossover study. Unit-wide effects may differ from individual effects due to "ecological fallacy". This post-hoc analysis of a cluster-randomized crossover study assesses differences between cycling and mixing rotation strategies in acquisition of carriage with Gram-negative ARB in individual patients.MethodsThis was a controlled cluster-randomized crossover study in 7 ICUs in 5 European countries. Clinical cultures taken as routine care were used for endpoint assessment. Patients with a first negative culture and at least one culture collected in total were included. Community acquisitions (2 days of admission or less) were excluded. Primary outcome was ICU-acquisition of Enterobacterales species with reduced susceptibility to: third- or fourth generation cephalosporins or piperacillin-tazobactam, and Acinetobacter species and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with reduced susceptibility for piperacillin-tazobactam or carbapenems. Cycling (altering first-line empiric therapy for Gram-negative bacteria, every other 6-weeks), to mixing (changing antibiotic type every empiric antibiotic course). Rotated antibiotics were third- or fourth generation cephalosporins, piperacillin-tazobactam and carbapenems.ResultsFor this analysis 1,613 admissions were eligible (855 and 758 during cycling and mixing, respectively), with 16,437 microbiological cultures obtained. Incidences of acquisition with ARB during ICU-stay were 7.3% (n = 62) and 5.1% (n = 39) during cycling and mixing, respectively (p-value 0.13), after a mean of 17.7 (median 15) and 20.8 (median 13) days. Adjusted odds ratio for acquisition of ARB carriage during mixing was 0.62 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.00). Acquired carriage with ARB were Enterobacterales species (n = 61), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 38) and Acinetobacter species (n = 20), with no statistically significant differences between interventions.ConclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference in individual patients' risk of acquiring carriage with Gram-negative ARB during cycling and mixing. These findings substantiate the absence of difference between cycling and mixing on the epidemiology of Gram-negative ARB in ICU.Trial registrationThis trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registered 10 January 2011, NCT01293071.

Project description:BackgroundAntibiotic-resistant bacteria, especially multidrug-resistant strains, play a key role in impeding critical patients from survival and recovery. The effectiveness of the empiric use of antibiotics in the circling manner in intensive care units (ICUs) has not been analyzed in detail and remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate antibiotic-cycling effect on the incidence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for studies focusing on whether a cycling strategy of empiric use of antibiotics could curb the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in ICUs. The major outcomes were risk ratios (RRs) of antibiotic-resistant infections or colonization per 1,000 patient days before and after the implementation of antibiotic cycling. A random-effects model was adopted to estimate results in consideration of clinical heterogeneity among studies. The registration number of the meta-analysis is CRD42018094464.ResultsTwelve studies, involving 2,261 episodes of resistant infections or colonization and 160,129 patient days, were included in the final analysis. Based on the available evidence, the antibiotic-cycling strategy did not reduce the overall incidence of infections or colonization with resistant bacteria (RR = 0.823, 95% CI 0.655-1.035, p = .095). In subgroup analyses, the cycling strategy cut down the incidence of resistant bacteria more significantly than baseline period (p = .028) but showed no difference in comparison with mixing strategy (p = .758).Linking evidence to actionAlthough the cycling strategy performed better than relatively free usage of antibiotics in the baseline period on reducing resistant bacteria, the cycling strategy did not show advantage when compared with the mixing strategy in subgroup analyses. In addition, these viewpoints still need more evidence to confirm.

Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyteÂ® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyteÂ® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyteÂ® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyteÂ® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyteÂ® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyteÂ® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples Retrospective, mutli-site sutdy using retrospective physician adjudication as a comparator

Dataset Information

Evaluation of a Mixing versus a Cycling Strategy of Antibiotic Use in Critically-Ill Medical Patients: Impact on Acquisition of Resistant Microorganisms and Clinical Outcomes.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluation of a Mixing versus a Cycling Strategy of Antibiotic Use in Critically-Ill Medical Patients: Impact on Acquisition of Resistant Microorganisms and Clinical Outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets