Does a Positive Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Nasal Screen Predict the Risk for MRSA Skin and Soft Tissue Infection?

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are often caused by gram-positive bacteria that colonize the skin. Given the overuse of antibiotics, SSTIs are increasingly caused by resistant bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Guidance on the utility of MRSA nasal screening for MRSA SSTI is limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether MRSA nasal screening predicts the risk of MRSA SSTIs. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult patients with an SSTI diagnosis that had MRSA nasal screening and wound cultures obtained within 48 hours of starting antibiotics. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated using VassarStats. Pretest and posttest probabilities were estimated with Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: A total of 884 patient encounters were reviewed between December 1, 2018, and October 31, 2021, and 300 patient encounters were included. The prevalence of MRSA SSTI was 18.3%. The MRSA nasal colonization had a sensitivity of 63.6%, specificity of 93.9%, positive predictive value of 70.0% (95% CI = 55.2%-81.7%), negative predictive value of 92.0% (95% CI = 87.7%-94.9%), positive likelihood ratio of 10.39 (95% CI = 6.12-17.65), negative likelihood ratio of 0.39 (95% CI = 0.27-0.55), positive posttest probability of 70.0%, and negative posttest probability of 8.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high positive likelihood ratio, a positive MRSA nasal screen was associated with a large increase in the probability of MRSA SSTI at our institution, and a negative MRSA nasal screen was associated with a small but potentially significant decrease in the probability of MRSA SSTI.

Prophylactic Enoxaparin in Critically Ill Trauma Patients: Evaluation of the Initial Dose.

Background: Trauma patients are at increased risk of developing venous thromboembolism given alterations in the coagulation cascade. Chemoprophylaxis with standard dosing of enoxaparin 30 mg subcutaneously twice daily has evolved to incorporate the use of anti-factor Xa (AFXa) trough level monitoring given concerns for decreased enoxaparin bioavailability in this patient population. Current available evidence suggests low rates of goal AFXa trough level achievement with standard enoxaparin dosing. Our study aims to identify the incidence of critically ill trauma patients that did not achieve goal AFXa trough levels and attempts to identify predictors that may influence the lack of achievement of goal levels. Methods: This was a retrospective, cohort analysis performed at a single academic medical center. Adult patients 18 years or older admitted to the surgical intensive care unit secondary to trauma who were initiated on standard prophylactic enoxaparin and had at least 1 AFXa trough level representative of steady state were included. Patient demographics and clinical data were collected, and descriptive statistics were utilized. All statistical tests were 2-tailed and a P < .05 was considered significant. Variables with a P < .10 on univariable analysis were included in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: A majority of our patient population did not achieve goal AFXa trough levels while receiving standard doses of prophylactic enoxaparin (82.4% [108/131]). Sub-target AFXa levels were associated with higher creatinine clearance values. Positive predictors of obtaining target AFXa levels included automobile versus pedestrian mechanism of injury and requiring an enoxaparin dose escalation to at least 40 mg twice daily. Conclusions: Our study found low rates of achievement of goal AFXa trough levels in critically ill trauma patients receiving standard prophylactic enoxaparin dosing. Certain variables were identified as negative and positive predictors for achievement of goal AFXa trough levels, although the biologic plausibility of these predictors is questionable and requires further investigation.

Andexanet alfa effectiveness and safety versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in intracranial hemorrhage while on apixaban or rivaroxaban: A single-center, retrospective, matched cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information directly comparing andexanet alfa (AA) versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) on apixaban or rivaroxaban. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of AA versus 4F-PCC in ICH on apixaban or rivaroxaban. METHODS: This retrospective, matched, cohort analysis was conducted at a single healthcare system. Patients were matched based on baseline ICH volume. The primary outcome was good or excellent ICH hemostasis, which was defined as a 35% or less increase in ICH volume within 24 h following AA or 4F-PCC administration. The secondary outcome was thrombotic events within 14 days following AA or 4F-PCC administration. RESULTS: In total, 26 AA and 26 4F-PCC patients were included in this matched cohort analysis. Both groups had comparable rates of good or excellent ICH hemostasis (AA: 92.3% vs. 4F-PCC: 88.5%, p = 1.000). Thrombotic events within 14-days were not significantly different (AA: 26.9% vs. 4F-PCC: 11.5%, p = 0.159). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This study found no significant differences in good or excellent ICH hemostasis within 24-h or new thrombotic events within 14-days in a cohort given AA or 4F-PCC for ICH while on apixaban or rivaroxaban. However, this single-center analysis is underpowered due to sample size constraints, therefore further high-quality research comparing AA safety and effectiveness versus 4F-PCC is needed.

Use of an argatroban systemic infusion and purge solution in a patient with a percutaneous ventricular assist device with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

PURPOSE: Thrombocytopenia can occur when using an Impella percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD), and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is often suspected. Data on heparin- and anticoagulant-free purge solutions in these devices are limited. Previous case reports have described argatroban-based purge solutions, both with and without systemic argatroban, at varying concentrations in patients with known or suspected HIT. SUMMARY: A 33-year-old male was transferred to our institution and emergently initiated on life support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), an Impella pVAD, and continuous venovenous hemofiltration to receive an urgent aortic valve replacement. Over the next several days, the patient's platelet count declined with a nadir of 17 × 103/µL on hospital day 13. The patient's 4T score for probability of HIT was calculated as 4. All heparin products were discontinued on hospital day 15, and the patient was initiated on systemic infusion with argatroban 1,000 µg/mL at a rate of 0.2 µg/kg/min with a purge solution of argatroban 0.05 mg/mL. The systemic infusion remained at a rate of 0.2 µg/kg/min, and the total argatroban dose was, on average, less than 0.25 µg/kg/min. On hospital day 21, the patient was transferred to another institution. CONCLUSION: Systemic infusion and a purge solution with argatroban were used in a patient with an Impella pVAD with multisystem organ dysfunction and suspected HIT. The patient achieved therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin times without adjustment of the systemic argatroban infusion and did not experience bleeding or thrombosis. Further studies concerning the safety and effectiveness of argatroban-based purge solutions in patients with pVADs are needed.

Trust your gut: Effect of a pharmacist-driven pilot project to decrease alvimopan use past gastrointestinal recovery in postsurgical patients.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: Alvimopan is a peripherally acting opioid receptor antagonist indicated to accelerate gastrointestinal (GI) recovery following surgery, but its benefits past GI recovery are unknown and evidence suggests that it may increase risk for myocardial infarction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a pilot alvimopan stewardship program aimed at intervening to discontinue alvimopan use following GI recovery. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study examining the first 5 months of the alvimopan stewardship pilot program. During this initial period, a pharmacy resident assessed whether each patient met criteria for GI recovery, defined as solid food toleration and first bowel movement or flatus. If a patient met the criteria for GI recovery, the resident intervened and recommended that the primary team discontinue alvimopan. Primary outcomes were the percentage of patients with alvimopan continued past GI recovery and the percentage of patients for whom alvimopan ordered past GI recovery was discontinued following intervention by stewardship. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of accepted recommendations to discontinue alvimopan following GI recovery and the number of alvimopan doses ordered following GI recovery. RESULTS: In total, 73 patients were included in the study analysis, all of whom underwent abdominal and/or urologic surgery. Alvimopan was ordered to be administered in 35.6% (26/73) of patients after GI recovery. The stewardship program intervened and recommended discontinuation on 50% (13/26) of the alvimopan doses ordered past GI recovery. Recommendations were accepted by the primary team for 92.3% (12/13) of the patients. A total of 51 doses of alvimopan were ordered for administration past GI recovery, with an average of 2 doses per patient. CONCLUSION: A pilot pharmacy-driven alvimopan stewardship program was able to identify and intervene on alvimopan orders continued past GI recovery. Interventions decreasing alvimopan use past GI recovery could be of benefit by minimizing potential risk and decreasing potential costs without a negative impact on patient outcomes.

Targeted Medication Deprescribing in the Elderly: Results of a Pharmacist-Driven Procedure in a Transitional Care Unit.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the impact of a pharmacist-driven deprescribing procedure on reduction of target medications at discharge among geriatric patients receiving care in a hospital-based transitional care unit.
DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center chart review.
SETTING: Transitional care unit located within a hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients 65 years of age and older were included if they were admitted to the transitional care unit between June 1, 2017, and December 15, 2017, on one or more of the following target medication classes: antihistamines, benzodiazepines, hypnotic sleep aids, proton-pump inhibitors, and skeletal muscle relaxants.
INTERVENTIONS: Pharmacists performed a structured review of patient's medications upon admission and utilized the deprescribing procedure developed by our institution to identify and deprescribe target medications in an attempt to optimize the patient's medication regimen prior to discharge.
RESULTS: Overall, 129 patients on 198 target medications were included in the study. Patients were on an average of 1.5 ± 0.78 target medications at admission, which was reduced to 0.78 ± 0.73 at discharge (P < 0.001). Overall, a 50% reduction of target medications was achieved.
CONCLUSION: A pharmacist-driven deprescribing procedure significantly reduced the quantity of target medications that older patients were discharged on.

Retrospective Assessment of Desmopressin Effectiveness and Safety in Patients With Antiplatelet-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVE: Current international guidelines offer a conditional recommendation to consider a single dose of IV desmopressin (DDAVP) for antiplatelet-associated intracranial hemorrhage based on low-quality evidence. We provide the first comparative assessment analyzing DDAVP effectiveness and safety in antiplatelet-associated intracranial hemorrhage. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Single tertiary care academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adult patients taking at least one antiplatelet agent based on presenting history and documented evidence of intracranial hemorrhage on cerebral CT scan were included. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: repeat cerebral CT scan not performed within the first 24 hours, noncomparative repeat cerebral CT scan, chronic anticoagulation, administration of fibrinolytic medications, concurrent ischemic stroke, and neurosurgical intervention. In total, 124 patients were included, 55 received DDAVP and 69 did not. INTERVENTIONS: DDAVP treatment at recognition of antiplatelet-associated intracranial hemorrhage versus nontreatment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary effectiveness outcome was intracranial hemorrhage expansion greater than or equal to 3 mL during the first 24 hospital hours. Primary safety outcomes were the largest absolute decrease from baseline serum sodium during the first 3 treatment days and new-onset thrombotic events during the first 7 days. DDAVP was associated with 88% decreased likelihood of intracranial hemorrhage expansion during the first 24 hours ([+] DDAVP, 10.9% vs [-] DDAVP, 36.2%; p = 0.002; odds ratio [95% CI], 0.22 [0.08-0.57]). Largest median absolute decrease from baseline serum sodium ([+] DDAVP, 0 mEq/L [0-5 mEq/L] vs [-] DDAVP, 0 mEq/L [0-2 mEq/L]; p = 0.089) and thrombotic events ([+] DDAVP, 7.3% vs [-] DDAVP, 1.4%; p = 0.170; odds ratio [95% CI], 5.33 [0.58-49.16]) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: DDAVP was associated with a decreased likelihood of intracranial hemorrhage expansion during the first 24 hours. DDAVP administration did not significantly affect serum sodium and thrombotic events during the study period.

Significant Hyperbilirubinemia and Acute Hepatocellular Jaundice in a Pediatric Patient Receiving Deferasirox: A Case Report.

Despite a boxed warning, postmarketing reports of deferasirox-associated hepatic injury in patients with chronic transfusions are not well described. Hepatic impairment, including failure, has been reported to occur more frequently in patients older than 55 years and in those with significant comorbidities, including liver cirrhosis and multiorgan failure. In this case report, we describe significant hyperbilirubinemia and acute hepatocellular jaundice related to deferasirox in a 7-year-old female being treated for iron overload secondary to chronic transfusions. This report outlines a unique case without preexisting risk factors in which other causes of liver injury are excluded as defined by the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method, which indicates a probable score of deferasirox causing the injury.

Evaluation of medication compliance for secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome.

To prevent recurrence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), national practice guidelines recommend use of five-drug combination therapy. Our study assessed the proportion of patients discharged on all five medications following ACS and determined reasons for nonadherence. A retrospective, single-center chart review was conducted at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients 18 years and older who were admitted to the cardiac care unit with a diagnosis of ACS between January 2013 and January 2015 were included. Overall, 200 patients were screened and 155 were included in the study. Half of the patients received all guideline-recommended classes of pharmacological agents at discharge. The other half-78 patients-did not receive the five-drug combination, of whom 48 (62%) had reasons documented for nonadherence. Our study's findings suggest that rates of adherence need to improve given the clear benefits of these medications.