Single-drug versus combination antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia due to Gram-negative pathogens: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

KEY MESSAGES: In this study including 391 critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia due to Gram-negative pathogens, combination therapy was not associated with a reduced hazard of death at Day 28 or a greater likelihood of clinical cure at Day 14. No over-risk of AKI was observed in patients receiving combination therapy. BACKGROUND: The benefits and harms of combination antimicrobial therapy remain controversial in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), ventilated HAP (vHAP) or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) involving Gram-negative bacteria. METHODS: We included all patients in the prospective multicenter OutcomeRea database with a first HAP, vHAP or VAP due to a single Gram-negative bacterium and treated with initial adequate single-drug or combination therapy. The primary endpoint was Day-28 all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were clinical cure rate at Day 14 and a composite outcome of death or treatment-emergent acute kidney injury (AKI) at Day 7. The average effects of combination therapy on the study endpoints were investigated through inverse probability of treatment-weighted regression and multivariable regression models. Subgroups analyses were performed according to the resistance phenotype of the causative pathogens (multidrug-resistant or not), the pivotal (carbapenems or others) and companion (aminoglycosides/polymyxins or others) drug classes, the duration of combination therapy (< 3 or ≥ 3 days), the SOFA score value at pneumonia onset (< 7 or ≥ 7 points), and in patients with pneumonia due to non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria, pneumonia-related bloodstream infection, or septic shock. RESULTS: Among the 391 included patients, 151 (38.6%) received single-drug therapy and 240 (61.4%) received combination therapy. VAP (overall, 67.3%), vHAP (16.4%) and HAP (16.4%) were equally distributed in the two groups. All-cause mortality rates at Day 28 (overall, 31.2%), clinical cure rate at Day 14 (43.7%) and the rate of death or AKI at Day 7 (41.2%) did not significantly differ between the groups. In inverse probability of treatment-weighted analyses, combination therapy was not independently associated with the likelihood of all-cause death at Day 28 (adjusted odd ratio [aOR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.77; P = 0.56), clinical cure at Day 14 (aOR, 0.79; 95% CI 0.53-1.20; P = 0.27) or death or AKI at Day 7 (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI 0.71-1.63; P = 0.73). Multivariable regression models and subgroup analyses provided similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Initial combination therapy exerts no independent impact on Day-28 mortality, clinical cure rate at Day 14, and the hazard of death or AKI at Day 7 in critically ill patients with mono-bacterial HAP, vHAP or VAP due to Gram-negative bacteria.

Treatment of positive catheter tip culture without bloodstream infections in critically ill patients. A case-cohort study from the OUTCOMEREA network.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact on subsequent infections and mortality of an adequate antimicrobial therapy within 48 h after catheter removal in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with positive catheter tip culture. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 29 centers of the OUTCOMEREA network. We developed a propensity score (PS) for adequate antimicrobial treatment, based on expert opinion of 45 attending physicians. We conducted a 1:1 case-cohort study matched on the PS score of being adequately treated. A PS-matched subdistribution hazard model was used for detecting subsequent infections and a PS-matched Cox model was used to evaluate the impact of antibiotic therapy on mortality. RESULTS: We included 427 patients with a catheter tip culture positive with potentially pathogenic microorganisms. We matched 150 patients with an adequate antimicrobial therapy with 150 controls. In the matched population, 30 (10%) subsequent infections were observed and 62 patients died within 30 days. Using subdistribution hazard models, the daily risk to develop subsequent infection up to Day-30 was similar between treated and non-treated groups (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.89, p = 0.78). Using Cox proportional hazard models, the 30-day mortality risk was similar between treated and non-treated groups (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.45-1.74, p = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Antimicrobial therapy was not associated with decreased risk of subsequent infection or death in short-term catheter tip colonization in critically ill patients. Antibiotics may be unnecessary for positive catheter tip cultures.

A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of post-intensive care multidisciplinary consultations on mortality and the quality of life at 1 year.

PURPOSE: Critical illness is associated with long-term increased mortality and impaired quality of life (QoL). We assessed whether multidisciplinary consultations would improve outcome at 12 months (M12) after intensive care unit (ICU) discharge. METHODS: We performed an open, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial. Eligible are patients discharged alive from ICU in 11 French hospitals between 2012 and 2018. The intervention group had a multidisciplinary face-to-face consultation involving an intensivist, a psychologist, and a social worker at ICU discharge and then at M3 and M6 (optional). The control group had standard post-ICU follow-up. A consultation was scheduled at M12 for all patients. The QoL was assessed using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Level (Euro-QoL-5D-5L) which includes five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain, and anxiety/depression), each ranging from 1 to 5 (1: no, 2: slight, 3: moderate, 4: severe, and 5: extreme problems). The primary endpoint was poor clinical outcome defined as death or severe-to-extreme impairment of at least one EuroQoL-5D-5L dimension at M12. The information was collected by a blinded investigator by phone. Secondary outcomes were functional, psychological, and cognitive status at M12 consultation. RESULTS: 540 patients were included (standard, n = 272; multidisciplinary, n = 268). The risk for a poor outcome was significantly greater in the multidisciplinary group than in the standard group [adjusted odds ratio 1.49 (95% confidence interval, (1.04-2.13)]. Seventy-two (13.3%) patients died at M12 (standard, n = 32; multidisciplinary, n = 40). The functional, psychological, and cognitive scores at M12 did not statistically differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A hospital-based, face-to-face, intensivist-led multidisciplinary consultation at ICU discharge then at 3 and 6 months was associated with poor outcome 1 year after ICU.

Hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for community acquired pneumonia-related septic shock: a subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids probably improve outcomes in patients hospitalised for community acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this a priori planned exploratory subgroup analysis of the phase 3 randomised controlled Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock (APROCCHSS) trial, we aimed to investigate responses to hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone between CAP and non-CAP related septic shock. METHODS: APROCCHSS was a randomised controlled trial that investigated the effects of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone, drotrecogin-alfa (activated), or both on mortality in septic shock in a two-by-two factorial design; after drotrecogin-alfa was withdrawn on October 2011, from the market, the trial continued on two parallel groups. It was conducted in 34 centres in France. In this subgroup study, patients with CAP were a preselected subgroup for an exploratory secondary analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone in septic shock. Adults with septic shock were randomised 1:1 to receive, in a double-blind manner, a 7-day treatment with daily administration of intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg bolus every 6h and a tablet of 50 µg of fludrocortisone via the nasogastric tube, or their placebos. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality at intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge, 28-day and 180-day mortality, the number of days alive and free of vasopressors, mechanical ventilation, or organ failure, and ICU and hospital free-days to 90-days. Analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00625209). FINDINGS: Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, CAP could not be ruled in or out in 31 patients, 562 had a diagnosis of CAP (279 in the placebo group and 283 in the corticosteroid group), and 648 patients did not have CAP (329 in the placebo group and 319 in the corticosteroid group). In patients with CAP, there were 109 (39%) deaths of 283 patients at day 90 with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone and 143 (51%) of 279 patients receiving placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·43-0·83). In patients without CAP, there were 148 (46%) deaths of 319 patients at day 90 in the hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone group and 157 (48%) of 329 patients in the placebo group (OR 0·95, 95% CI 0·70-1·29). There was significant heterogeneity in corticosteroid effects on 90-day mortality across subgroups with CAP and without CAP (p=0·046 for both multiplicative and additive interaction tests; moderate credibility). Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, 648 (52%) had ARDS (328 in the placebo group and 320 in the corticosteroid group). There were 155 (48%) deaths of 320 patients at day 90 in the corticosteroid group and 186 (57%) of 328 patients in the placebo group. The OR for death at day 90 was 0·72 (95% CI 0·53-0·98) in patients with ARDS and 0·85 (0·61-1·20) in patients without ARDS (p=0·45 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·42 for additive interaction). The OR for observing at least one serious adverse event (corticosteroid group vs placebo) within 180 days post randomisation was 0·64 (95% CI 0·46-0·89) in the CAP subgroup and 1·02 (0·75-1·39) in the non-CAP subgroup (p=0·044 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·042 for additive interaction). INTERPRETATION: In a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of patients with CAP and septic shock, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone reduced mortality as compared with placebo. Although a large proportion of patients with CAP also met criteria for ARDS, the subgroup analysis was underpowered to fully discriminate between ARDS and CAP modifying effects on mortality reduction with corticosteroids. There was no evidence of a significant treatment effect of corticosteroids in the non-CAP subgroup. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique of the French Ministry of Health, by Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir, France 2030, and IAHU-ANR-0004.