Utility of ampicillin-sulbactam for empiric treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a trauma population.

BACKGROUND: Ampicillin-sulbactam is guideline-recommended treatment for early-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). However, intensive care unit clinicians are encountering increasing resistance to ampicillin-sulbactam. We sought to analyze the time period for early-onset VAP in our trauma population by using daily evaluation of resistance to ampicillin-sulbactam. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was completed on all mechanically ventilated trauma patients admitted to a rural level-1 trauma center from January 2003 to December 2008 who were diagnosed with VAP. Daily bacterial resistance to ampicillin-sulbactam > 15% was defined as the threshold for early empiric antibiotic failure for the first episode of VAP. A univariate analysis of risk factors for multi-drug resistant pathogens (MDRPs) and comorbidities was completed to assess for predisposing factors for ampicillin-sulbactam resistance. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-three pathogens were identified in 121 trauma patients diagnosed with VAP. Of these isolates, 71% were gram-negative, 28% were gram-positive, and 1% was fungal. Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (23.9%), H aemophilus influenzae (20.9%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (11.7%) were the most common infecting organisms. Daily ampicillin-sulbactam resistance was 40%, 26%, 32%, 43%, 50%, and 60% on days 3 to 7 and ≥ 8 days, respectively. Only the presence of MDRP risk factors (89% vs. 65%, p < 0.01) and hospital LOS (36.8 [22.8-49.0] vs. 25.7 days [19.0-32.5], p < 0.01) was different between ampicillin- sulbactam resistant and ampicillin-sulbactam susceptible VAP groups. On univariate analysis, hospital length of stay >4 days and antibiotic use within 90 days were associated with ampicillin-sulbactam resistant VAP (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Ampicillin-sulbactam is not an effective empiric therapy for early-onset VAP in our rural trauma population. The utility of ampicillin-sulbactam should be reviewed at other institutions to assess for appropriate empiricism.

New FDA-Approved Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis.

PURPOSE: Interferon injectables and glatiramer acetate have served as the primary disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) since their introduction in the 1990s and are first-line treatments for relapsing-remitting forms of MS (RRMS). Many new drug therapies were launched since early 2010, expanding the drug treatment options considerably in a disease state that once had a limited treatment portfolio. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the safety profile and efficacy data of disease-modifying agents for MS approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 2010 to the present and provide cost and available pharmacoeconomic data about each new treatment. METHODS: Peer-reviewed clinical trials, pharmacoeconomic studies, and relevant pharmacokinetic/pharmacologic studies were identified from MEDLINE (January 2000-December 2014) by using the search terms multiple sclerosis, fingolimod, teriflunomide, alemtuzumab, dimethyl fumarate, pegylated interferon, peginterferon beta-1a, glatiramer 3 times weekly, and pharmacoeconomics. Citations from available articles were also reviewed for additional references. The databases publically available at www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.fda.gov were searched for unpublished studies or studies currently in progress. FINDINGS: A total of 5 new agents and 1 new dosage formulation were approved by the FDA for the treatment of RRMS since 2010. Peginterferon beta-1a and high-dose glatiramer acetate represent 2 new effective injectable options for MS that reduce burden of administration seen with traditional interferon and low-dose glatiramer acetate. Fingolimod, teriflunomide, and dimethyl fumarate represent new oral agents available for MS, and their efficacy in reducing annualized relapse rates is 48% to 55%, 22% to 36.3%, and 44% to 53%, respectively, compared with placebo. Alemtuzumab is a biologic given over a 2-year span that reduced annualized relapse rates by 55% in treatment-naive patients and by 49% in patients relapsing on prior disease-modifying agents. Treatment emergent adverse effects were common with all new drug treatments. The cost of treating MS remains high, because MS therapies accounted for the highest spending growth of any specialty drug class in 2013. Most therapies cost, on average, US $6000/mo based on wholesale acquisition cost, and few cost-benefit studies are available for new treatments. IMPLICATIONS: With expansion of new treatments, patients and providers now have multiple options and improved flexibility in managing MS. The relative place in therapy of new treatments is unknown, and treatment decisions are largely based on patient preference, efficacy, and risk potential. The cost of treating MS continues to be high, even with more treatment options available.

Anticoagulation management around percutaneous bedside procedures: is adjustment required?

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) are frequently performed bedside in the intensive care unit. Critically ill patients frequently require anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet (AP) therapies for myriad indications. There are no societal guidelines proffering strategies to manage AC/AP therapies periprocedurally for bedside PEG or PDT. The aim of this study is to evaluate the management of AC/AP therapies around PEG/PDT, assess periprocedural bleeding complications, and identify risk factors associated with bleeding. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study of all adult patients admitted from October 2004 to December 2009 receiving a bedside PEG or PDT was conducted. Patients were identified by procedure codes via an in-hospital database. A medical record review was performed for each included patient. RESULTS: Four hundred fifteen patients were included, with 187 PEGs and 352 PDTs being performed. Prophylactic anticoagulation was held for approximately one dose before and two doses or less after the procedure. There was wide variation in patterns of holding therapy in patients receiving anticoagulation via continuous infusion. There were 19 recorded minor bleeding events, 1 (0.5%) with PEG and 18 (5.1%) with PDT, with no hemorrhagic events. No association was found between international normalized ratio, prothrombin time, or activated partial thromboplastin time values and bleed risk (p = 0.853, 0.689, and 0.440, respectively). Platelet count was significantly lower in patients with a bleeding event (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: We found that while practice patterns were quite consistent in regard to the management of prophylactic anticoagulation, it varied widely in patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation. It seems that prophylactic anticoagulation use did not affect bleed risk with PEG/PDT.

Discontinuation of vasopressin before norepinephrine increases the incidence of hypotension in patients recovering from septic shock: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: There are little data regarding the discontinuation of vasoactive medications in patients recovering from septic shock. We designed this retrospective cohort study to evaluate the incidence of hypotension based on the order of removal of norepinephrine (NE) and vasopressin (AVP) in patients receiving concomitant NE and AVP infusions for the treatment of septic shock. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients receiving concomitant NE and AVP infusions for septic shock admitted to the intensive care units of a tertiary care academic medical center were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 50 included patients, the first vasoactive medication discontinued was NE in 32 patients and AVP in 18 patients. The groups had similar Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores at shock onset and at the time of discontinuation of the first agent. Five patients who had NE discontinued first (16%) versus 10 patients who had AVP discontinued first (56%) developed hypotension within 24 hours (unadjusted relative risk, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-4.5; P = .008). In a multivariate analysis, only discontinuation of AVP first was independently associated with hypotension (adjusted relative risk, 5.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-21.0; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation of AVP before NE may lead to a higher incidence of hypotension in patients recovering from septic shock receiving concomitant AVP and NE.