The burden of neutropenic sepsis in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with single-agent docetaxel: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe rates of confirmed and suspected neutropenic sepsis (NS) and associated hospital resource utilisation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with docetaxel monotherapy following relapse after ≥1 line of chemotherapy in routine UK clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-centre, retrospective, observational research study was conducted in seven centres across England and Wales. Adult patients with stage III/IV NSCLC initiated on docetaxel monotherapy between 2010 and 2016 in routine clinical practice (aged ≥18 years at initiation) following failure of first-line chemotherapy were eligible. Data were collected from hospital medical records between May 2016 and July 2016, on all episodes of confirmed or suspected NS related to docetaxel monotherapy, including patient characteristics. Episodes of confirmed NS were defined as documented absolute neutrophil count <1.0×109/L, plus temperature >38°C or other signs/symptoms of sepsis, otherwise episodes were classified as suspected NS. RESULTS: 121 patients were included (median age 65.5 years; 57.9% male; median 4.0 cycles of docetaxel; 19.8% treated with prophylactic granulocyte-colony stimulating factor). Episodes of confirmed or suspected NS were recorded in 21/121 (17.4%) patients (11 confirmed episodes in 11 [9.1%] patients and 11 suspected episodes in 10 [8.3%] patients). Resource utilisation data were available for 21/22 episodes; the mean length of stay for confirmed NS admissions (n=11) was 9.2 (SD: 9.2) days and for suspected NS admissions (n=10) was 4.7 (SD: 4.6) days. The most commonly prescribed treatment for NS was piperacillin/tazobactam therapy (46.5% of all documented treatments). The mean total costs of managing patients with confirmed NS (n=11) and suspected NS (n=9) were £3163 (SD: £2921) and £1790 (SD: £1585) per patient, respectively. CONCLUSION: Rates of confirmed NS in UK clinical practice were broadly similar to those reported in clinical trials; however, the burden of suspected NS, not routinely reported elsewhere, is also substantial.

Cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole compared with piperacillin/tazobactam as empiric therapy for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections based on the in-vitro surveillance of bacterial isolates in the UK.

AIMS: An increase in the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among gram-negative pathogens has been noted recently. A challenge in empiric treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) is identifying initial appropriate antibiotic therapy, which is associated with reduced length of stay and mortality compared with inappropriate therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole compared with piperacillin/tazobactam (commonly used in this indication) in the treatment of patients with cIAI in UK hospitals. METHODS: A decision-analytic Monte Carlo simulation model was used to compare costs (antibiotic and hospitalization costs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of patients infected with gram-negative cIAI and treated empirically with either ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole or piperacillin/tazobactam. Bacterial isolates were randomly drawn from the Program to Assess Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Susceptibility (PACTS) database, a surveillance database of non-duplicate bacterial isolates collected from patients in the UK infected with gram-negative pathogens. Susceptibility to initial empiric therapy was based on the measured susceptibilities reported in the PACTS database. RESULTS: Ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole was cost-effective when compared with piperacillin/tazobactam, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £4,350/QALY and 0.36 hospitalization days/patient saved. Costs in the ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole arm were £2,576/patient, compared with £2,168/patient in the piperacillin/tazobactam arm. The ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole arm experienced a greater number of QALYs than the piperacillin/tazobactam arm (14.31/patient vs 14.21/patient, respectively). Ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole remained cost-effective in one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Economic models can help to identify the appropriate choice of empiric therapy for the treatment of cIAI. Results indicated that empiric use of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole is cost-effective vs piperacillin/tazobactam in UK patients with cIAI at risk of resistant infection. This will be valuable to commissioners and clinicians to aid decision-making on the targeting of resources for appropriate antibiotic therapy under the premise of antimicrobial stewardship.

Cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with piperacillin/tazobactam as empiric therapy based on the in-vitro surveillance of bacterial isolates in the United States for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections.

BACKGROUND: A challenge in the empiric treatment of complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) is identifying the initial appropriate antibiotic therapy (IAAT), which is associated with reduced length of stay and mortality compared with initial inappropriate antibiotic therapy (IIAT). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with piperacillin/tazobactam (one of the standard of care antibiotics), for the treatment of hospitalized patients with cUTI. METHODS: A decision-analytic Monte Carlo simulation model was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness of empiric treatment with either ceftolozane/tazobactam or piperacillin/tazobactam in hospitalized adult patients with cUTI infected with Gram-negative pathogens in the US. The model applies the baseline prevalence of resistance as reported by national in-vitro surveillance data. RESULTS: In a cohort of 1000 patients, treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam resulted in higher total costs compared with piperacillin/tazobactam ($36,413 /patient vs. $36,028/patient, respectively), greater quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (9.19/patient vs. 9.13/patient, respectively) and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $6128/QALY. Ceftolozane/tazobactam remained cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $100,000 per QALY compared to piperacillin/tazobactam over a range of input parameter values during one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Model results show that ceftolozane/tazobactam is likely to be cost-effective compared with piperacillin/tazobactam for the empiric treatment of hospitalized cUTI patients in the United States.

Clinical outcomes of extended versus intermittent administration of piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia: a randomized controlled trial.

The purpose of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics, clinical efficiency, and pharmacoeconomic parameters of piperacillin/tazobactam administered by extended infusion (EI) or intermittent infusion (II) in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) in critically ill patients with low illness severity in China. Fifty patients completed the study, with 25 patients receiving 4/0.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam over 30 min as the II group and 25 patients receiving 4/0.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam over 3 h every 6 h as the EI group. Drug assay was performed using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The percentage of the dosing interval for which the free piperacillin concentration (%fT) exceeds the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was calculated. The patients' therapy cost, clinical efficiency, and adverse effects were also recorded. %fT>MIC was about 100, 98.73, and 93.04 % in the EI arm versus 81.48, 53.29, and 42.15 % in the II arm, respectively, when the microorganism responsible for HAP had an MIC of 4, 8, and 16 mg/L. The therapy cost in the EI group was lower than that of the II group ($1351.72 ± 120.39 vs. $1782.04 ± 164.51, p = 0.001). However, the clinical success rate, clinical failure rate, and drug-related adverse events did not significantly differ between groups. EI treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam was a cost-effective approach to the management of HAP, being equally clinically effective to conventional II.

Impact of piperacillin-tazobactam shortage on meropenem use: implications for antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Drug shortages pose a clear detriment to antimicrobial stewardship (AS) efforts. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of a piperacillin-tazobactam shortage on meropenem use, related costs, and associated changes in AS activity. A quasi-experimental quality improvement review compared adult patients receiving meropenem ≥72h three months pre-shortage and three months during the shortage. 320 patients were included (pre-shortage: 103; shortage: 217). Baseline characteristics were similar, but the length of stay was slightly longer in pre-shortage [19 (11-32) days] versus shortage [16 (11-32) days] (p=0.094). In pre-shortage and shortage, median days of therapy and estimated meropenem cost were 7 (5-11) and 7 (5-10) and $309.93 ($173.60-$507.03) and $255.30 ($204.24-$424.31), respectively (p=0.411 and p=0.050). Frequency of ID consultation was similar (16.8% in pre- and 25.3% in shortage, p=0.091). AS interventions increased during the shortage period (99 in pre-shortage and 205 in shortage). De-escalation occurred in 19.4% versus 32.7% of the patients in pre-shortage and shortage (p=0.014). The piperacillin-tazobactam shortage was associated with a 111% increase in meropenem prescriptions despite active AS, but was not associated with changes in mortality, length of therapy, or meropenem costs. AS should be aware that shortages may require proactive countermeasures to avoid inappropriate antimicrobial use during shortage periods.

Evaluation Outcomes Associated with Alternative Dosing Strategies for Piperacillin/Tazobactam: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

A better dosing strategy can improve clinical outcomes for patients. We systematically reviewed the literatures to determine whether any clinical benefits exist for piperacillin/tazobactam by extended or continuous infusion. Methods - A search of PubMed, Web of Science, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, Embase and related ICAAC and ACCP conferences were conducted up to September 5, 2015. Randomized controlled and observational studies that compared extended or continuous infusion with conventional intermittent infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam were identified from the databases above and analyzed. Two reviewers independently evaluated the methodology and extracted data from primary studies. A meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.2 software. The quality of each study was assessed. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were evaluated. Results - Three randomized controlled trials and twelve observational studies were included in this study. All included studies had high quality and no publication bias was found. Compared to the conventional intermittent infusion approach, the extended or continuous infusion group had a significant cost effectiveness (OR -0.89.02, CI (-114.69,-63.35), P<0.00001). No statistical difference was observed for clinical cure rate (OR 1.64, 95% CI (0.88, 3.30), P=0.12) between the two dosing regimens. The sensitivity analysis showed the results were stable. Conclusions - Our systematic review and meta-analysis found that the outcomes associated with alternative dosing strategies of piperacillin/tazobactam have changed compared with conclusions before for several literatures with large samples published. Further data on the outcomes should be generated for a better understanding of the extended or continuous infusion strategy. On the whole, our meta-analysis suggested that the extended or continuous infusion should be recommended for clinical use only considering its economic advantage, but there was no significantly higher clinical cure rate and lower mortality rate compared with the conventional intermittent infusion. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Empirical Extended-Infusion Piperacillin-Tazobactam in a Community Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: Current medical center practice allows for the automatic conversion of all piperacillin/tazobactam orders from intermittent to extended infusion (EI). OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and cost impact of empirical extended-infusion piperacillin/tazobactam. METHODS: All consecutive patients treated with piperacillin/tazobactam for >48 hours were reviewed for inclusion. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: (1) traditional infusion (TI), preprotocol implementation, and (2) EI, postprotocol implementation. Patient demographics and primary and secondary diagnoses were extracted from the hospital discharge database. All patients were assessed for the primary end point of all cause 14-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, duration of antibiotic therapy, cost per treatment course, and occurrence of Clostridium difficile infection. RESULTS: A total of 2150 patients were included (EI = 632; TI = 1518). After adjusting for comorbidity, length of stay, and age, 14-day in-hospital mortality was similar between groups (odds ratio = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.85-1.58; P = 0.37). Length of stay was similar between the EI group versus TI (mean ± SD: 12.5 ± 9.58 days vs 11.8 ± 9.58 days, respectively; P = 0.10) after adjusting for age and Chalson-Deyo comorbidity index. Total cost per treatment course was reduced in the EI group by 13% compared with the TI group ($565.90 ± $257.70 vs $648.30 ± $349.20, respectively; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Automatic substitution of EI for TI piperacillin/tazobactam is safe and associated with significant cost savings. EI piperacillin/tazobactam was not associated with a reduction in mortality or length of stay.

Impact of a Dynamic Microbiological Environment on the Clinical Efficacy of Ertapenem and Piperacillin/Tazobactam in the Treatment of Complicated Community-Acquired Intra-Abdominal Infection in Spain: A Cost-Consequence Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The microbial susceptibility of many antibiotics has been affected by prescribing patterns and their extensive use. The purpose of this evaluation was to assess how these changes could affect the initial efficacy of ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) acquired in the community and the potential consequences this may have in healthcare costs in Spain. METHODS: The Initial efficacy of ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam for patients with APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) II scores <10 was extracted from a multicenter randomized study and were combined with the current microbial susceptibilities obtained from the SMART study, a multinational surveillance program. Country-specific pathogens distribution was extracted from a national study in patients with community-acquired IAI. The estimated effectiveness was used in a decision-analytic model to compare total costs between ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated IAI. The model performs extensive one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The model suggested a savings of €209 (year 2012 values) per patient when complicated IAIs acquired in the community (APACHE II <10) were treated with ertapenem instead of piperacillin/tazobactam. One-way sensitivity analyses showed length of stay as the key driver parameter. Further analysis of this parameter and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of our evaluation, with a 58% likelihood of ertapenem being dominant. CONCLUSIONS: Ertapenem appears to be a cost-saving strategy over piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of patients with complicated IAIs acquired in the community in Spain.

Extended-Infusion versus standard-infusion piperacillin-tazobactam for sepsis syndromes at a tertiary medical center.

Piperacillin-tazobactam (PTZ) is frequently used as empirical and targeted therapy for Gram-negative sepsis. Time-dependent killing properties of PTZ support the use of extended-infusion (EI) dosing; however, studies have shown inconsistent benefits of EI PTZ treatment on clinical outcomes. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who received EI PTZ treatment and historical controls who received standard-infusion (SI) PTZ treatment for presumed sepsis syndromes. Data on mortality rates, clinical outcomes, length of stay (LOS), and disease severity were obtained. A total of 843 patients (662 with EI treatment and 181 with SI treatment) were available for analysis. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar, except for fewer female patients receiving EI treatment. No significant differences between the EI and SI groups in inpatient mortality rates (10.9% versus 13.8%; P = 0.282), overall LOS (10 versus 12 days; P = 0.171), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS (7 versus 6 days; P = 0.061), or clinical failure rates (18.4% versus 19.9%; P = 0.756) were observed. However, the duration of PTZ therapy was shorter in the EI group (5 versus 6 days; P < 0.001). Among ICU patients, no significant differences in outcomes between the EI and SI groups were observed. Patients with urinary or intra-abdominal infections had lower mortality and clinical failure rates when receiving EI PTZ treatment. We did not observe significant differences in inpatient mortality rates, overall LOS, ICU LOS, or clinical failure rates between patients receiving EI PTZ treatment and patients receiving SI PTZ treatment. Patients receiving EI PTZ treatment had a shorter duration of PTZ therapy than did patients receiving SI treatment, and EI dosing may provide cost savings to hospitals.

Continuous infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam in patients with severe infections: A possible pharmacokinetic optimisation?

Piperacillin/Tazobactam is a time-dependent antimicrobial combination (beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor) commonly used in the treatment of severe Gram-negative infections. The optimisation of its time-dependent bactericidal activity via continuous infusion could improve clinical outcomes. Several studies have been realized on the relevance of a continuous infusion, but, to date, no definitive position can be adopted on the matter and a well-designed randomized controlled trial is warranted. In other articles, continuous infusion regimens are also more cost efficient. This article is an update, including the most recent trials about this subject.

Piperacillin-tazobactam as a cost effective monotherapy in febrile neutropenia.

BACKGROUND: Fever in neutropenic patient is a medical emergency. Timely intervention with antibiotics has been demonstrated to be effective. We assessed Piperacillin-Tazobactem as a cost effective mono-therapy in solid malignancy patients in our institution in relation to dual antibiotic therapy and other monotherapies. METHODS: This study was conducted to determine the efficacy, and cost effectiveness of Piperacillin-Tazobactem as monotherapy in febrile neutropenia. Total 150 patients with chemotherapy induced febrile neutropenia were selected. Piperacillin-Tazobactem was given intravenously 4500 mg every 6 hour. Outcome was assessed as success and failure. Success was defined as afebrile for four consecutive days, clearance of signs of infection, no new cultures, and no recurrence of primary infection after completion of therapy. Failure was defined as modification or addition of antibiotic due to clinical deterioration, cultured organism resistant to Piperacillin-Tazobactem and Death. RESULTS: The mean age was 43 years, 31% males and 69% were females. Out of total 150 patients, 73 patients were of breast carcinoma. There were 143 patients with negative blood cultures, and 7 patients with positive blood cultures, out of which 3 patients were resistant to Piperacillin-Tazobactem. Success was achieved in 83.3% of total patients. Daily cost of Piperacillin-Tazobactem was much less in relation to other monotherapies and dual antibiotic therapy including Gentamicin. None of the patient had adverse effects of Piperacillin-Tazobactem. CONCLUSION: We concluded that Piperacillin-Tazobactem is a safe, well tolerated as well as cost effective monotherapy in patient with febrile neutropenia with solid cancers. Only two percent organisms were resistant to Pipercillin-Tazobactam.

[Piperacillin-tazobactam in continuous or expanded perfusion vs intermittent perfusion]. / Piperacilina-tazobactam en perfusión continua o expandida frente a perfusión intermitente.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this review was to analyse the differences in efficacy between the administration of intermittent and continuous/expanded perfusion of piperacillin-tazobactam. Secondary objectives were to analyse the differences in safety, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters, and cost-effectiveness between the two forms of administration. METHOD: We performed two different independent bibliographic searches. We encountered a total of 38 articles, and the final number included in the study was 6. We analysed the articles and collected the following variables: design, treatment administered to each group, total number of patients and number of patients in each study, variables collected in each study, and results. RESULTS: We encountered significant differences in the primary variable in two of the six studies favouring continuous/expanded perfusion. The study by Lodise et al found differences (P=.04) in mortality (31.6% for intermittent perfusion vs 12.2% for continuous/expanded perfusion). The study by Lorente et al found differences (P=.001) in terms of clinical recovery (56.5% for intermittent perfusion vs 89.2% for continuous/expanded perfusion). As for secondary variables, we only found differences in one of the studies in relation to cost-effectiveness, in favour of the group who underwent continuous/expanded perfusion method. CONCLUSION: The analysed data suggest that continuous/expanded perfusion would be at least as effective as intermittent perfusion, and that it could be more effective in severe patients with infections from more resistant micro-organisms such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Additionally, this form of administration is more cost-effective, at least in theory.

Changes in the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics after cefepime shortage: a time series analysis.

The original cefepime product was withdrawn from the Swiss market in January 2007 and replaced by a generic 10 months later. The goals of the study were to assess the impact of this cefepime shortage on the use and costs of alternative broad-spectrum antibiotics, on antibiotic policy, and on resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa toward carbapenems, ceftazidime, and piperacillin-tazobactam. A generalized regression-based interrupted time series model assessed how much the shortage changed the monthly use and costs of cefepime and of selected alternative broad-spectrum antibiotics (ceftazidime, imipenem-cilastatin, meropenem, piperacillin-tazobactam) in 15 Swiss acute care hospitals from January 2005 to December 2008. Resistance of P. aeruginosa was compared before and after the cefepime shortage. There was a statistically significant increase in the consumption of piperacillin-tazobactam in hospitals with definitive interruption of cefepime supply and of meropenem in hospitals with transient interruption of cefepime supply. Consumption of each alternative antibiotic tended to increase during the cefepime shortage and to decrease when the cefepime generic was released. These shifts were associated with significantly higher overall costs. There was no significant change in hospitals with uninterrupted cefepime supply. The alternative antibiotics for which an increase in consumption showed the strongest association with a progression of resistance were the carbapenems. The use of alternative antibiotics after cefepime withdrawal was associated with a significant increase in piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem use and in overall costs and with a decrease in susceptibility of P. aeruginosa in hospitals. This warrants caution with regard to shortages and withdrawals of antibiotics.

Treating pneumonia in critical care in the United Kingdom following failure of initial antibiotic: a cost-utility analysis comparing meropenem with piperacillin/tazobactam.

BACKGROUND: Treating patients admitted to critical care with severe pneumonia requires timely intervention with an effective antibiotic. This reduces the risk of dying of pneumonia and minimises complications associated with a prolonged stay in critical care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of meropenem 1 g/8 h with piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g/8 h for treating pneumonia in UK critical care. METHODS: A Markov model was built to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of using meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam to treat severe pneumonia. Estimates of effectiveness, utility weights and costs were obtained from published sources. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to address uncertainty in the model results. RESULTS: Cost of treating a patient with severe pneumonia was estimated as £19,026 with meropenem and £19,978 with piperacillin/tazobactam, respectively. QALYs gained were 4.768 with meropenem and 4.654 with piperacillin/tazobactam. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed meropenem to be consistently less costly and more effective than piperacillin/tazobactam. CONCLUSION: The additional efficacy of meropenem translates into more patients surviving critical care and leaving this high-cost service more quickly than if they had been treated with piperacillin/tazobactam. As meropenem is more effective and less expensive than piperacillin/tazobactam at treating patients with severe pneumonia, it is the dominant treatment option.

Continuous infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam in ventilator-associated pneumonia: a pilot study on efficacy and costs.

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) occurs in nearly one-third of mechanically ventilated patients in the Intensive Care Unit. Piperacillin/tazobactam (TZP) is currently recommended in the empirical treatment of VAP, but intermittent dosing may result in inadequate serum concentrations. The efficacy and costs of continuous infusion (CI) of TZP, using therapeutic drug monitoring for real-time dose adjustment, was assessed in a prospective pilot study of 16 patients with VAP. TZP was given as a loading dose of 2.0/0.25 g followed by a CI of 10.0/1.25g daily. Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing was used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the pathogens. TZP concentrations were determined by high-pressure liquid chromatography before and at 1, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h after the onset of administration. Dosages were adjusted to maintain piperacillin concentrations four-fold above the MIC (T>4 × MIC) of the pathogen, with a maximum dose of 16.0/2.0 g. The cost of the total TZP administered was compared with the cost of a standard TZP regimen (16.0/2.0 g) if given over the same period of time. The median MIC for TZP was 1 µg/mL (range 0.025-32 µg/mL). TZP concentrations were adequate for 71% of pathogens on the first day of therapy. Clinical cure was achieved in 9/10 patients who had adequate drug concentrations and in 3/6 patients with insufficient levels. The daily dose of TZP received by CI was 37.5% less than that of a standard regimen, which corresponds to a saving of €15 on daily therapy costs compared with the standard regimen. In conclusion, CI of TZP achieved optimal drug concentrations in most patients with VAP, with a favourable impact on costs. Adequate drug concentrations were achieved for MIC ≤ 4 µg/mL, but higher dosages should be considered for the treatment of pathogens with low susceptibility thresholds.

Rationale and evidence for extended infusion of piperacillin-tazobactam.

PURPOSE: The pharmacodynamics and therapeutic effects of extended-infusion (EI) piperacillin-tazobactam therapy are reviewed, with an emphasis on growing evidence of its advantages over traditional infusion schemes. SUMMARY: EI ß-lactam therapy is now considered a key aspect of antimicrobial stewardship, and published evidence indicates that i.v. infusion of piperacillin-tazobactam over extended periods (e.g., four hours) instead of the traditionally recommended 30 minutes may offer several advantages, including reduced mortality and length of hospital stay and lower treatment cost. A substantial body of evidence from in vitro and animal studies indicates that EI enhances the pharmacodynamic profile of piperacillin-tazobactam, particularly by extending the time the free drug level remains above the minimum inhibitory concentration. In one published study comparing the use of EI and traditional piperacillin-tazobactam infusion schemes in critically ill patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, EI therapy was associated with significantly improved 14-day mortality and significantly shorter hospital stays; a few other studies have yielded less favorable results. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations indicate that EI can offer significant cost benefits. However, evidence of the benefits of EI in actual clinical practice remains relatively weak, highlighting the need for large, controlled clinical trials to define its optimal role in patient care. CONCLUSION: The pharmacodynamic profile of EI piperacillin-tazobactam therapy; evidence of its benefits over traditional 30-minute infusions in terms of mortality, duration of hospitalization, clinical and microbiological cure rates, and reduction of fever; and EI's lower total treatment cost suggest that EI may be the superior mode of administration.

The impact of a nationwide antibiotic restriction program on antibiotic usage and resistance against nosocomial pathogens in Turkey.

PURPOSE: Antimicrobial resistance among microorganisms is a global concern. In 2003, a nationwide antibiotic restriction program (NARP) was released in Turkey. In this study we evaluated the effect of NARP on antibiotic consumption, antimicrobial resistance, and cost. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data obtained from all of the four university hospitals, and one referral tertiary-care educational state hospital in Ankara. Antimicrobial resistance profiles of 14,233 selected microorganisms all grown in blood cultures and antibiotic consumption from 2001 to 2005 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: A negative correlation was observed between the ceftriaxone consumption and the prevalence of ceftriaxone resistant E.coli and Klebsiella spp. (rho:-0.395, p:0.332 and rho:-0.627, p:0.037, respectively). The decreased usage of carbapenems was correlated with decreased carbapenems-resistant Pseudomonas spp. and Acinetobacter spp (rho:0.155, p:0.712 and rho:0.180, p:0.668, respectively for imipenem). Methicillin resistance rates of S.aureus were decreased from 44% to 41%. After two years of NARP 5,389,155.82 USD saving occurred. CONCLUSION: NARP is effective in lowering the costs and antibiotic resistance.

Development and implementation of a piperacillin-tazobactam extended infusion guideline.

Administration of ß-lactam antibiotics by extended infusion optimizes the pharmacodynamic properties and bactericidal activity of these agents resulting in a potential improvement in patient outcomes and reduction in drug expenditure. Consequently, a pharmacist-led piperacillin-tazobactam extended 4-hour infusion guideline was implemented hospital-wide at a 500-bed academic medical center. Each piperacillin-tazobactam infusion was prospectively monitored for 5 weeks to ensure accurate administration and identify barriers to guideline adherence. Overall, a total of 103 patients received 1215 doses of piperacillin-tazobactam by extended infusions. In all, 98% of the doses were administered at the correct extended infusion rate and 94% of the doses were given at the scheduled time. There were a total of 20 missed doses and 53 delayed doses, accounting for 2% and 4% of the total administered doses, respectively. The primary barrier to adherence was the patient not being on the unit at the time of the scheduled dose followed by the piperacillin-tazobactam dose not being available on the floor. While insufficient power prevented meaningful evaluation of clinical outcomes, we anticipate a conservative annual estimated cost savings of $108,529. Key elements contributing to our success included consistent pharmacy leadership, multidisciplinary involvement, thorough inservicing to health care professionals, hospital-wide implementation, and extensive quality assurance monitoring.

Implementation of an extended-infusion piperacillin-tazobactam program at an urban teaching hospital.

PURPOSE: The development and implementation of an extended-infusion piperacillin-tazobactam program at an urban teaching hospital are described. SUMMARY: A multidisciplinary team was formed to address the feasibility of converting from the standard 30-minute infusion to an extended infusion of piperacillin- tazobactam. Before hospitalwide implementation, feasibility studies were performed in a subset of patients to identify potential barriers to program implementation. On the day of hospitalwide conversion, the orderables for piperacillin-tazobactam were reprogrammed in the computerized prescriber-order-entry system to allow separate options for the 30-minute infusion (for pediatric patients) and the extended-infusion regimen. After selecting the orderable for the extended-infusion regimen, an electronic message appeared to remind prescribers of the rationale for this change and recommended indications for piperacillin-tazobactam. Program success was prospectively evaluated on 11 weekdays after hospitalwide conversion for all 96 adult inpatients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam. Of the 194 piperacillin-tazobactam doses observed, 90% were appropriate, with compliance increasing to 100% by the end of the observation period. There was near-complete cessation of the every-6-hour dosage interval and a marked increase in the every-8-hour and every-12-hour dosage intervals. The number of piperacillin-tazobactam doses per 1000 patient-days significantly decreased during the postimplementation period. During the postimplementation period, pharmacy expenditures related to piperacillin-tazobactam decreased by 18% and the total number of grams of piperacillin-tazobactam purchased decreased by 24%. CONCLUSION: A hospitalwide program for the administration of extended-infusion piperacillin-tazobactam was safely and successfully implemented using a multi-disciplinary approach in an urban teaching hospital.

Accounting for the development of antibacterial resistance in the cost effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of diabetic foot infections in the UK.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Increased antibacterial use is associated with a greater likelihood of reduced effectiveness as a result of resistance development in the future. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of diabetic foot infections (DFIs) from the UK NHS perspective, accounting for the development of antibacterial resistance over time. METHODS: A decision-tree model was developed to estimate the cost effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam at different timepoints in the 36 months following introduction of treatment. Development of antibacterial resistance was incorporated in the analysis using a previously published compartment (susceptible-infected-susceptible) model. The development of resistance was a function of the clearance rate of pathogens and the size of the proportion of the population prescribed the antibacterial. The microbiological clearance rate and clinical success rates were assumed to be related and were obtained from the SIDESTEP study. These data included resistant pathogens (either acquired or intrinsic resistance) such as Enterobacteriaceae, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Model outcomes over time included lifetime QALYs, direct medical costs (year 2006 values) and cost per QALY saved. Clinical efficacy of second-line treatment, direct medical costs and utilities were derived from other existing studies. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to estimate the uncertainty of model outcomes. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5% per annum. RESULTS: The model suggested savings of pound407 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] -337, 1501) per patient when DFIs were treated with ertapenem instead of piperacillin/tazobactam after 1 month's treatment. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested a 91% probability of the incremental cost per QALY saved being within a threshold for cost effectiveness of pound20,000. After 3 years it is expected that the antibacterial resistance profile with piperacillin/tazobactam would increase at a greater rate than with ertapenem. As a result, the cost savings with ertapenem are expected to increase to pound3465 (95% UI 2502, 4564), and ertapenem will additionally result in greater clinical success rates and lifetime QALY savings (1.16; 95% UI 0.46, 2.06). CONCLUSION: Ertapenem appears to be a cost-saving and possibly an economically dominant therapy over piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of patients with DFIs from the UK NHS perspective.