Cargando…

Clinical Impact of Ceftriaxone Resistance in Escherichia coli Bloodstream Infections: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Ceftriaxone-resistant (CRO-R) Escherichia coli bloodstream infections (BSIs) are common. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort of patients with E coli BSI at 14 United States hospitals between November 2020 and April 2021. For each patient with a CRO-R E coli BSI enrolled, the next conse...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tamma, Pranita D, Komarow, Lauren, Ge, Lizhao, Garcia-Diaz, Julia, Herc, Erica S, Doi, Yohei, Arias, Cesar A, Albin, Owen, Saade, Elie, Miller, Loren G, Jacob, Jesse T, Satlin, Michael J, Krsak, Martin, Huskins, W Charles, Dhar, Sorabh, Shelburne, Samuel A, Hill, Carol, Baum, Keri R, Bhojani, Minal, Greenwood-Quaintance, Kerryl E, Schmidt-Malan, Suzannah M, Patel, Robin, Evans, Scott R, Chambers, Henry F, Fowler, Vance G, van Duin, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9645644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36381622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac572
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Ceftriaxone-resistant (CRO-R) Escherichia coli bloodstream infections (BSIs) are common. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort of patients with E coli BSI at 14 United States hospitals between November 2020 and April 2021. For each patient with a CRO-R E coli BSI enrolled, the next consecutive patient with a ceftriaxone-susceptible (CRO-S) E coli BSI was included. Primary outcome was desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) at day 30, with 50% probability of worse outcomes in the CRO-R group as the null hypothesis. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to reduce confounding. RESULTS: Notable differences between patients infected with CRO-R and CRO-S E coli BSI included the proportion with Pitt bacteremia score ≥4 (23% vs 15%, P = .079) and the median time to active antibiotic therapy (12 hours [interquartile range {IQR}, 1–35 hours] vs 1 hour [IQR, 0–6 hours]; P < .001). Unadjusted DOOR analyses indicated a 58% probability (95% confidence interval [CI], 52%–63%) for a worse clinical outcome in CRO-R versus CRO-S BSI. In the IPW-adjusted cohort, no difference was observed (54% [95% CI, 47%–61%]). Secondary outcomes included unadjusted and adjusted differences in the proportion of 30-day mortality between CRO-R and CRO-S BSIs (−5.3% [95% CI, −10.3% to −.4%] and −1.8 [95% CI, −6.7% to 3.2%], respectively), postculture median length of stay (8 days [IQR, 5–13 days] vs 6 days [IQR, 4–9 days]; P < .001), and incident admission to a long-term care facility (22% vs 12%, P = .045). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CRO-R E coli BSI generally have poorer outcomes compared to patients infected with CRO-S E coli BSI, even after adjusting for important confounders.