Cargando…

Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials

BACKGROUND: Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae with a piperacillin-tazobactam–nonsusceptible/ceftriaxone-susceptible (TZP-NS/CRO-S) phenotype have been increasingly identified, with limited available literature evaluating treatment strategies. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of noncr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cao, John, Dubrovskaya, Yanina, Siegfried, Justin, Decano, Arnold, Mazo, Dana, Hochman, Sarah, Zacharioudakis, Ioannis M, So, Jonathan, Solomon, Sadie, Papadopoulos, John, Marsh, Kassandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10249260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37305841
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad262
_version_ 1785055522518466560
author Cao, John
Dubrovskaya, Yanina
Siegfried, Justin
Decano, Arnold
Mazo, Dana
Hochman, Sarah
Zacharioudakis, Ioannis M
So, Jonathan
Solomon, Sadie
Papadopoulos, John
Marsh, Kassandra
author_facet Cao, John
Dubrovskaya, Yanina
Siegfried, Justin
Decano, Arnold
Mazo, Dana
Hochman, Sarah
Zacharioudakis, Ioannis M
So, Jonathan
Solomon, Sadie
Papadopoulos, John
Marsh, Kassandra
author_sort Cao, John
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae with a piperacillin-tazobactam–nonsusceptible/ceftriaxone-susceptible (TZP-NS/CRO-S) phenotype have been increasingly identified, with limited available literature evaluating treatment strategies. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of noncritically ill adults hospitalized between 2013 and 2021 and treated at least 48 hours for TZP-NS/CRO-S E coli or K pneumoniae infections. The primary composite endpoint included escalation to intensive care unit, infection- or treatment-related readmission, mortality, and infection recurrence. Outcomes were compared between groups who received carbapenem (CG) versus carbapenem-sparing agents (CSG) as targeted gram-negative therapy. RESULTS: Of 1062 patients screened, 200 were included (CG, n = 51; CSG, n = 149). Baseline characteristics, including Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI; median [interquartile range], 6 [3–9] vs 6 [4–9]; P = .704), were similar between groups, except for more immunocompromised CG patients (29% vs 11%, P = .001). The most common infection sources were urinary (31% vs 57%, P = .002) and bloodstream (18% vs 17%, P = .887). Eighty-eight percent of the CG received meropenem, while 58% of the CSG received ceftriaxone as targeted therapy. There was no statistical difference in the primary endpoint between overall groups (27% vs 17%, P = .123), nor when stratified by infection source. More patients in the CSG switched to oral therapy (15 [29%] vs 100 [67%], P < .001). In multivariate analysis, CCI was an independent predictor of the primary outcome (odds ratio [OR], 1.199 [95% confidence interval, 1.074–1.340]; P = .001), while treatment with carbapenem-sparing therapy was not. CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not find improved clinical outcomes with targeted carbapenem therapy for TZP-NS/CRO-S infections. Carbapenem-sparing agents may be considered to spare carbapenems in noncritically ill patients similar to those included in our cohort.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10249260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102492602023-06-09 Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials Cao, John Dubrovskaya, Yanina Siegfried, Justin Decano, Arnold Mazo, Dana Hochman, Sarah Zacharioudakis, Ioannis M So, Jonathan Solomon, Sadie Papadopoulos, John Marsh, Kassandra Open Forum Infect Dis Major Article BACKGROUND: Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae with a piperacillin-tazobactam–nonsusceptible/ceftriaxone-susceptible (TZP-NS/CRO-S) phenotype have been increasingly identified, with limited available literature evaluating treatment strategies. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of noncritically ill adults hospitalized between 2013 and 2021 and treated at least 48 hours for TZP-NS/CRO-S E coli or K pneumoniae infections. The primary composite endpoint included escalation to intensive care unit, infection- or treatment-related readmission, mortality, and infection recurrence. Outcomes were compared between groups who received carbapenem (CG) versus carbapenem-sparing agents (CSG) as targeted gram-negative therapy. RESULTS: Of 1062 patients screened, 200 were included (CG, n = 51; CSG, n = 149). Baseline characteristics, including Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI; median [interquartile range], 6 [3–9] vs 6 [4–9]; P = .704), were similar between groups, except for more immunocompromised CG patients (29% vs 11%, P = .001). The most common infection sources were urinary (31% vs 57%, P = .002) and bloodstream (18% vs 17%, P = .887). Eighty-eight percent of the CG received meropenem, while 58% of the CSG received ceftriaxone as targeted therapy. There was no statistical difference in the primary endpoint between overall groups (27% vs 17%, P = .123), nor when stratified by infection source. More patients in the CSG switched to oral therapy (15 [29%] vs 100 [67%], P < .001). In multivariate analysis, CCI was an independent predictor of the primary outcome (odds ratio [OR], 1.199 [95% confidence interval, 1.074–1.340]; P = .001), while treatment with carbapenem-sparing therapy was not. CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not find improved clinical outcomes with targeted carbapenem therapy for TZP-NS/CRO-S infections. Carbapenem-sparing agents may be considered to spare carbapenems in noncritically ill patients similar to those included in our cohort. Oxford University Press 2023-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10249260/ /pubmed/37305841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad262 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Major Article
Cao, John
Dubrovskaya, Yanina
Siegfried, Justin
Decano, Arnold
Mazo, Dana
Hochman, Sarah
Zacharioudakis, Ioannis M
So, Jonathan
Solomon, Sadie
Papadopoulos, John
Marsh, Kassandra
Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials
title Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials
title_full Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials
title_fullStr Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials
title_full_unstemmed Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials
title_short Treatment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam–Nonsusceptible/Ceftriaxone-Susceptible Infections With Carbapenem Versus Carbapenem-Sparing Antimicrobials
title_sort treatment of piperacillin-tazobactam–nonsusceptible/ceftriaxone-susceptible infections with carbapenem versus carbapenem-sparing antimicrobials
topic Major Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10249260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37305841
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad262
work_keys_str_mv AT caojohn treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT dubrovskayayanina treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT siegfriedjustin treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT decanoarnold treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT mazodana treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT hochmansarah treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT zacharioudakisioannism treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT sojonathan treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT solomonsadie treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT papadopoulosjohn treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials
AT marshkassandra treatmentofpiperacillintazobactamnonsusceptibleceftriaxonesusceptibleinfectionswithcarbapenemversuscarbapenemsparingantimicrobials