Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Quantifying Gram-Negative Resistance to Empiric Treatment After Repeat ExpoSure To AntimicRobial Therapy (RESTART).
Wibisono, Arya; Harb, Gaielle; Crotty, Matthew; Rahmanzadeh, Kristen; Alexander, Julie; Hunter, Leigh; Dominguez, Edward.
Afiliación
  • Wibisono A; Department of Pharmacy, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
  • Harb G; Department of Pharmacy, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
  • Crotty M; Department of Pharmacy, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
  • Rahmanzadeh K; Department of Pharmacy, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
  • Alexander J; Department of Internal Medicine, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
  • Hunter L; Department of Internal Medicine, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
  • Dominguez E; Organ Transplant Infectious Diseases, Methodist Transplant Specialists, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(12): ofac659, 2022 Dec.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36582770
ABSTRACT

Background:

Antibiotic exposure is a primary predictor of subsequent antibiotic resistance; however, development of cross-resistance between antibiotic classes is also observed. The impact of changing to a different antibiotic from that of previous exposure is not established.

Methods:

This was a retrospective, single-center cohort study of hospitalized adult patients previously exposed to an antipseudomonal ß-lactam (APBL) for at least 48 hours in the 90 days prior to the index infection with a gram-negative bloodstream or respiratory infection. Susceptibility rates to empiric therapy were compared between patients receiving the same (repeat group) versus a different antibiotic from prior exposure (change group).

Results:

A total of 197 patients were included (n = 94 [repeat group] and n = 103 [change group]). Pathogen susceptibility to empiric therapy was higher in the repeat group compared to the change group (76.6% vs 60.2%; P = .014). After multivariable logistic regression, repeat APBL was associated with an increased likelihood of pathogen susceptibility (adjusted odds ratio, 2.513; P = .012). In contrast, there was no difference in susceptibility rates between the repeat group and the subgroup of change patients who received an empiric APBL (76.6% vs 78.5%; P = .900). Longer APBL exposure duration (P = .012) and chronic kidney disease (P = .002) were associated with higher nonsusceptibility to the exposure APBL. In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the repeat and change groups (18.1% vs 23.3%; P = .368).

Conclusions:

The common practice of changing to a different APBL from that of recent exposure may not be warranted.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Open Forum Infect Dis Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Open Forum Infect Dis Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos