Risk of Resistant Organisms and Clostridium difficile with Prolonged Systemic Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Central Nervous System Devices.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged systemic antibiotic prophylaxis for central nervous system (CNS) devices may be associated with increased risk of antimicrobial resistance. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of prolonged CNS device antibiotic prophylaxis on the growth of resistant microorganisms and Clostridium difficile. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, cohort study included patients admitted to intensive care units with traumatic brain injury or other neurocritical illness. Patients who received a CNS device and antibiotic prophylaxis for at least 72 h were compared to patients with similar neurologic injuries who did not receive a CNS device. RESULTS: Study (n = 116) and control (n = 557) patients had mean APACHE II scores of 17.7 ± 9.2 and 15.1 ± 10.6 (p = 0.004) with 53.4 and 24.6 % receiving craniotomies (p < 0.001), respectively. Mean CNS device duration was 9.9 days, and 73 % of patients received cefuroxime for prophylaxis. The study cohort had a higher absolute incidence of resistant organisms compared with the control cohort (15.5 vs 4.1 %; odds ratio 1.93, 95 % CI 0.93-4.03, p = 0.078), though the study was underpowered to show statistical significance in multivariate analysis. C. difficile incidence was similar between groups (2.6 vs 2.0 %; odds ratio 1.45, 95 % CI 0.35-6.12, p = 0.61). CONCLUSION: We found a higher incidence of resistant organisms in patients receiving prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis with a CNS device, but similar incidence of C. difficile compared to controls. Lack of data supporting prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis for CNS devices and the risk of nosocomial infections with resistant organisms encourage limiting prophylactic antibiotics to a short periprocedural course.

Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Medical Patients Receiving Chemoprophylaxis: A Focus on Obesity and Other Risk Factors.

PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of 90-day venous thromboembolism (VTE) in obese critically ill medical patients receiving VTE chemoprophylaxis with nonobese patients of similar illness severity. We also identified other VTE risk factors. METHODS: Eligible patients spent ≥24 hours in an intensive care unit between November 2007 and November 2013 and received VTE chemoprophylaxis within 48 hours of admission. The primary outcome was 90-day VTE. RESULTS: A total of 11 111 patients were evaluated, of which 1732 obese and 1831 nonobese patients were enrolled with mean BMIs of 38.9 ± 9.2 kg/m(2) and 24.5 ± 3.1 kg/m(2) and mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores of 28.4 ± 11.8 and 26.6 ± 11.7, respectively. The rate of 90-day VTE for the total cohort, obese, and nonobese patients was 6.5%, 7.5%, and 5.5%, respectively. Obese patients were more likely to develop VTE compared with nonobese patients (odds ratio [OR]: 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 -1.93). Other risk factors significantly associated with 90-day VTE included prior VTE (OR: 3.93; 95% CI: 1.83-8.48), trauma with surgery in the previous 30 days (OR: 3.70; 95% CI: 1.39-9.86), central venous catheters (OR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.87-3.72), surgery within 90 days (OR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.61-3.58), mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.39-2.71), male sex (OR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.13-2.14), and increasing age using 1-year increments (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01 -1.03). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of VTE in critically ill medical patients remains high despite standard chemoprophylaxis. Obesity is among 8 risk factors independently associated with 90-day VTE.

Recommendations for the use of medications with continuous enteral nutrition.

PURPOSE: Recommendations for the use of medications with continuous enteral nutrition are provided. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to identify primary literature reporting medication interactions with continuous enteral nutrition. For medications without supporting literature, manufacturers were contacted for information. Package inserts for specific medications were also investigated for any information to help guide recommendations. If no specific recommendations were made by the pharmaceutical manufacturer or the package insert concerning administration of products with continuous enteral nutrition, a tertiary database was consulted. Recommendations were generated by a consensus of clinicians for those medications that lacked specific recommendations in the primary literature or from the pharmaceutical manufacturer. Documentation of medication interactions with continuous enteral nutrition and food was then collated along with specific recommendations on how to administer the medication with regard to continuous enteral nutrition. Recommendations were classified as strong (grade 1) or weak (grade 2). The quality of evidence was classified as high (grade A), moderate (grade B), or low (grade C). RESULTS: Forty-six medications commonly given to hospitalized patients were evaluated. Twenty-four medications had recommendations based on available data, and the remaining 22 medications had recommendations based on a consensus of clinicians. CONCLUSION: There was a lack of published data regarding drug-nutrient interactions for a majority of the drugs commonly administered to patients receiving continuous enteral nutrition. Clinicians should recognize potential drug-nutrient interactions and use available evidence to optimize patients' drug therapy.

Inappropriate continuation of stress ulcer prophylactic therapy after discharge.

BACKGROUND: Medications for stress ulcer prophylaxis are appropriately started in critically ill patients with risks for developing stress ulcers. It is unknown whether these drugs are discontinued once the risk factors are removed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the duration of stress ulcer prophylactic therapy in critically ill patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted at a multidisciplinary, 24 bed medical/surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of a university-affiliated tertiary referral medical center. Three hundred ninety-four patients fulfilled eligibility criteria during the study period of July 1, 2005, through September 30, 2005. Patients were considered to be appropriately discharged from the hospital on gastric acid suppressants if they met any of the following criteria: continued mechanical ventilation, gastroesophageal reflux disease, peptic ulcer disease, history of gastrointestinal ulceration or bleeding within the past year, prescribed medications used for stress ulcer prophylaxis prior to admission, gastrointestinal bleed during hospitalization, or prescriber indication of reason to continue therapy. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-seven patients received stress ulcer prophylaxis during their ICU stay. Of these, 80% continued on gastric acid suppressants on transfer from the ICU, with 60% of the therapy being inappropriate. The percentage of critically ill patients discharged from the hospital with inappropriate prescription of gastric acid suppressants was 24.4%. Based on the average wholesale cost, the total cost for unnecessary gastric acid suppressant therapy within the follow-up period was $13,973. CONCLUSIONS: Gastric acid suppressant medications initially prescribed for stress ulcer prophylaxis are frequently prescribed inappropriately on discharge for patients who were initially admitted to the medical/surgical ICU.