Association of kidney function with effectiveness of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment: a patient-level meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials.

Objectives: Patients with impaired kidney function have a significantly slower decrease of procalcitonin (PCT) levels during infection. Our aim was to study PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship and clinical outcomes in patients with impairments of kidney function as assessed by creatinine levels measured upon hospital admission. Methods: We pooled and analyzed individual data from 15 randomized controlled trials who were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic therapy based on a PCT-algorithms or based on standard of care. We stratified patients on the initial glomerular filtration rate (GFR, ml/min/1.73 m2) in three groups (GFR >90 [chronic kidney disease; CKD 1], GFR 15-89 [CKD 2-4] and GFR<15 [CKD 5]). The main efficacy and safety endpoints were duration of antibiotic treatment and 30-day mortality. Results: Mean duration of antibiotic treatment was significantly shorter in PCT-guided (n=2,492) compared to control patients (n=2,510) (9.5-7.6 days; adjusted difference in days -2.01 [95% CI, -2.45 to -1.58]). CKD 5 patients had overall longer treatment durations, but a 2.5-day reduction in treatment duration was still found in patients receiving in PCT-guided care (11.3 vs. 8.6 days [95% CI -3.59 to -1.40]). There were 397 deaths in 2,492 PCT-group patients (15.9%) compared to 460 deaths in 2,510 control patients (18.3%) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.88 [95% CI 0.78 to 0.98)]. Effects of PCT-guidance on antibiotic treatment duration and mortality were similar in subgroups stratified by infection type and clinical setting (p interaction >0.05). Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms that the use of PCT in patients with impaired kidney function, as assessed by admission creatinine levels, is associated with shorter antibiotic courses and lower mortality rates.

The good, the bad and the ugly: pandemic priority decisions and triage.

In this analysis we discuss the change in criteria for triage of patients during three different phases of a pandemic like COVID-19, seen from the critical care point of view. Availability of critical care beds has become a hot topic, and in many countries, we have seen a huge increase in the provision of temporary intensive care bed capacity. However, there is a limit where the hospitals may run out of resources to provide critical care, which is heavily dependent on trained staff, just-in-time supply chains for clinical consumables and drugs and advanced equipment. In the first (good) phase, we can still do clinical prioritisation and decision-making as usual, based on the need for intensive care and prognostication: what are the odds for a good result with regard to survival and quality of life. In the next (bad phase), the resources are mostly available, but the system is stressed by many patients arriving over a short time period and auxiliary beds in different places in the hospital being used. We may have to abandon admittance of patients with doubtful prognosis. In the last (ugly) phase, usual medical triage and priority setting may not be sufficient to decrease inflow and there may not be enough intensive care unit beds available. In this phase different criteria must be applied using a utilitarian approach for triage. We argue that this is an important transition where society, and not physicians, must provide guidance to support triage that is no longer based on medical priorities alone.

Effect of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment on clinical outcomes in intensive care unit patients with infection and sepsis patients: a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The clinical utility of serum procalcitonin levels in guiding antibiotic treatment decisions in patients with sepsis remains unclear. This patient-level meta-analysis based on 11 randomized trials investigates the impact of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy on mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with infection, both overall and stratified according to sepsis definition, severity, and type of infection. METHODS: For this meta-analysis focusing on procalcitonin-guided antibiotic management in critically ill patients with sepsis of any type, in February 2018 we updated the database of a previous individual patient data meta-analysis which was limited to patients with respiratory infections only. We used individual patient data from 11 trials that randomly assigned patients to receive antibiotics based on procalcitonin levels (the "procalcitonin-guided" group) or the current standard of care (the "controls"). The primary endpoint was mortality within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were duration of antibiotic treatment and length of stay. RESULTS: Mortality in the 2252 procalcitonin-guided patients was significantly lower compared with the 2230 control group patients (21.1% vs 23.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 0.99; p = 0.03). These effects on mortality persisted in a subgroup of patients meeting the sepsis 3 definition and based on the severity of sepsis (assessed on the basis of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, occurrence of septic shock or renal failure, and need for vasopressor or ventilatory support) and on the type of infection (respiratory, urinary tract, abdominal, skin, or central nervous system), with interaction for each analysis being > 0.05. Procalcitonin guidance also facilitated earlier discontinuation of antibiotics, with a reduction in treatment duration (9.3 vs 10.4 days; adjusted coefficient -1.19 days, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.66; p <  0.001). CONCLUSION: Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment in ICU patients with infection and sepsis patients results in improved survival and lower antibiotic treatment duration.