Cefepime vs carbapenems for treating third-generation cephalosporin-resistant AmpC ß-lactamase-hyperproducing Enterobacterales bloodstream infections: a multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: AmpC ß-lactamase-hyperproducing Enterobacterales (ABLHE) bloodstream infections (BSI) are emerging and leading to therapeutic challenges worldwide. Prescriptions of carbapenems may lead to the emergence of resistance. This study aimed to compare cefepime with carbapenems for the treatment of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant ABLHE BSI. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included patients with ABLHE BSI from two tertiary hospitals in France, between July 2017 and July 2022. Non-AmpC-producing Enterobacterales, extended-spectrum ß-lactamase, and carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales were excluded. Cefepime was prescribed only in case of minimal inhibitory concentration ≤1 mg/l. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality from the date of index blood culture. Secondary outcomes were infection recurrence and treatment toxicity. An inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was used to balance the baseline characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: We analyzed 164 BSI, which included 77 in the cefepime group and 87 in the carbapenem group. In the weighted cohort, the 30-day mortality rates were similar between the cefepime group (23.3%) and the carbapenem group (19.6%) with a relative risk of 1.19 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-2.33 P = 0.614). No significant difference in recurrence or toxicity was found between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This study adds evidence in favor of the use of cefepime for treating third-generation cephalosporin-resistant ABLHE BSI in case of minimal inhibitory concentration ≤ 1 mg/l, which could spare carbapenems.

Peritoneal Metastases of Colorectal Origin Treated with Complete Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: The Efficiency of Mitomycin C.

BACKGROUND: Survival of patients affected by colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM) can be improved with combined complete cytoreductive surgery (CCRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Two chemotherapeutic agents are mainly used: mitomycin C (MMC) and oxaliplatin. A recent prospective randomized clinical trial showed that oxaliplatin-based HIPEC does not improve survival compared with CCRS alone. The purpose of our study was to compare the survival effectiveness of MMC versus oxaliplatin-based HIPEC using a homogeneous surgical technique and drug protocol. METHODS: This retrospective monocentric study included all patients prospectively registered for having undergone CCRS and HIPEC using MMC or oxaliplatin for CRC-PM in Strasbourg University Hospital, France, from December 2004 until December 2019. MMC-based HIPEC and oxaliplatin-based HIPEC groups were compared with an inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients were included. Groups were comparable for all baseline characteristics except for peritoneal carcinomatosis index. In the weighted multivariate analysis, disease-free survival (DFS) and peritoneal disease-free survival (PDFS) were significantly higher in the MMC-based HIPEC group compared with the oxaliplatin-based HIPEC group with a hazard ratio of 0.74 (CI 95% 0.56-0.98), p = 0.035 and 0.59 (CI 95% 0.40-0.98), p = 0.0084, respectively. There was no difference in overall survival or postoperative morbidity between groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results favor a superiority of MMC for DFS and PDFS in comparison with oxaliplatin in HIPEC after CCRS in treatment with curative intent for CRC-PM.

Local anesthesia versus general anesthesia during endovascular therapy for acute stroke: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: To date, the choice of optimal anesthetic management during endovascular therapy (EVT) of acute ischemic stroke patients remains subject to debate. We aimed to compare functional outcomes and complication rates of EVT according to the first-line anesthetic management in two comprehensive stroke centers: local anesthesia (LA) versus general anesthesia (GA). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected databases, identifying all consecutive EVT for strokes in the anterior circulation performed between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 in two EVT-capable stroke centers. One center performed EVT under LA in the first intention, while the other center systematically used GA. Using propensity score analysis, the two groups underwent 1:1 matching, then procedural metrics, complications, and clinical outcomes were compared. Good outcome was defined as 90 days modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤2, and successful recanalization as modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Ischemia (mTICI) 2b-3. RESULTS: During the study period, 219 patients were treated in the LA center and 142 in the GA center. Using the propensity score, 97 patients from each center were matched 1:1 according to the baseline characteristics. Local anesthesia was associated with a significantly lower proportion of good outcome (36.1% vs 52.0%, OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.87; p=0.039), lower rate of successful recanalization (70.1% vs 95.8%, OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.39; p<0.001), and more procedural complications (14.4% vs 3.0%, OR 3.44, 95% CI 1.09 to 14.28; p=0.018). There were no significant differences in 90-day mortality or symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation rates. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, systematic use of GA for stroke EVT was associated with better clinical outcomes, higher recanalization rates, and fewer procedural complications compared with patients treated under LA as the primary anesthetic approach.