Seven-day antibiotic therapy for Enterobacterales bacteremia in high-risk neutropenic patients: toward a new paradigm.

PURPOSE: Data on short courses of antibiotic therapy for Enterobacterales bacteremia in high-risk neutropenic patients are limited. The aim of the study was to describe and compare the frequency of bacteremia relapse, 30-day overall and infection-related mortality, Clostridiodes difficile infection and length of hospital stay since bacteremia among those who received antibiotic therapy for 7 or 14 days. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study in adult high-risk neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies or hematopoietic stem cell transplant and monomicrobial Enterobacterales bacteremia. They received appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy, had a clinical response within 7 days, and infection source control. Clinical, epidemiological and outcomes variables were compared based on 7 or 14 days of AT. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were included (100, 7-day antibiotic therapy; 100, 14-day antibiotic therapy). Escherichia coli was the pathogen most frequently isolated (47.5%), followed by Klebsiella sp. (40.5%). Among those patients that received 7-day vs. 14-day antibiotic course, a clinical source of bacteremia was found in 54% vs. 57% (p = 0.66), multidrug-resistant Enterobacterales isolates in 28% vs. 30% (p = 0.75), and 40% vs. 47% (p = 0.31) received combined empirical antibiotic therapy. Overall mortality was 3% vs. 1% (p = 0.62), in no case related to infection; bacteremia relapse was 7% vs. 2% (p = 0.17), and length of hospital stay since bacteremia had a median of 9 days (IQR: 7-15) vs. 14 days (IQR: 13-22) (p = < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that seven-day antibiotic therapy might be adequate for patients with high-risk neutropenia and Enterobacterales bacteremia, who receive appropriate empirical therapy, with clinical response and infection source control.

Ceftazidime-Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia.

Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam (CA) for Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia (KPC-PEB) in high-risk neutropenic patients. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in high-risk neutropenic patients with multi-drug resistant Enterobacterales bacteremia. They were compared according to the resistance mechanism and definitive treatment provided: KPC-CPE treated with CA (G1), KPC-CPE treated with other antibiotics (G2), and patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia who received appropriate definitive therapy (G3). Thirty-day mortality was evaluated using a logistic regression model, and survival was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves. A total of 238 patients were included: 18 (G1), 52 (G2), and 168 (G3). Klebsiella spp. (60.9%) and Escherichia coli (26.4%) were the Enterobacterales most frequently isolated, and 71% of the bacteremias had a clinical source. The resistance profile between G1 and G2 was colistin 35.3% vs. 36.5%, amikacin 16.7% vs. 40.4%, and tigeclycline 11.1% vs. 19.2%. The antibiotics prescribed in combination with G2 were carbapenems, colistin, amikacin, fosfomycin, tigecycline, and fluoroquinolones. Seven-day clinical response in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 94.4% vs. 42.3% vs. 82.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). Thirty-day overall mortality in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 22.2% vs. 53.8% vs. 11.9%, respectively (p < 0.001), and infection-related mortality was 5.5% vs. 51.9% vs. 7.7% (p < 0.001). The independent risk factors for mortality were Pitt score > 4: OR 3.63, 95% CI, 1.18-11.14 (p = 0.025) and KPC-PEB treated with other antibiotics: OR 8.85, 95% CI, 2.58-30.33 (p = 0.001), while 7-day clinical response was a protective factor for survival: OR 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01-0.08 (p < 0.001). High-risk neutropenic patients with KPC-CPE treated with CA had an outcome similar to those treated for ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, with higher 7-day clinical response and lower overall and infection-related mortality than those treated with other antibiotics. In view of these data, CA may be considered the preferred therapeutic option for KPC-PEB in high-risk neutropenic patients.

Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of Latin American healthcare workers relating to antibiotic stewardship and antibiotic use: a cross-sectional multi-country study.

BACKGROUND: The burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Latin America is high. Little is known about healthcare workers' (HCWs) knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship (AS), AMR, and antibiotic use (AU) in the region. METHODS: HCWs from 42 hospitals from 5 Latin American countries were invited to take an electronic, voluntary, anonymous survey regarding knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of AS, AMR, and AU between March-April 2023. FINDINGS: Overall, 996 HCWs completed the survey (52% physicians, 32% nurses, 11% pharmacists, 3% microbiologists, and 2% "other"). More than 90% of respondents indicated optimizing AU was a priority at their healthcare facility (HCF), 69% stated the importance of AS was communicated at their HCF, and 23% were unfamiliar with the term "antibiotic stewardship". Most (> 95%) respondents acknowledged that appropriate AU can reduce AMR; however, few thought AU (< 30%) or AMR (< 50%) were a problem in their HCF. Lack of access to antibiogram and to locally endorsed guidelines was reported by 51% and 34% of HCWs, respectively. Among prescribers, 53% did not consider non-physicians' opinions to make antibiotic-related decisions, 22% reported not receiving education on how to select antibiotics based on culture results and 60% stated patients and families influence their antibiotic decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Although HCWs perceived improving AU as a priority, they did not perceive AU or AMR as a problem in their HCF. AS opportunities include improved access to guidelines, access to AMR/AU data, teamwork, and education on AS for HCWs and patients and families.

Development of a Clinical Score to Stratify the Risk for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Bacteremia in Patients with Cancer and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Identifying the risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) bacteremia in cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients would allow earlier initiation of an appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in patients from 12 centers in Argentina, who presented with cancer or hematopoietic stem-cell transplant and developed Enterobacterales bacteremia. A multiple logistic regression model identified risk factors for CRE bacteremia, and a score was developed according to the regression coefficient. This was validated by the bootstrap resampling technique. Four hundred and forty-three patients with Enterobacterales bacteremia were included: 59 with CRE and 384 with carbapenem-susceptible Enterobacterales (CSE). The risk factors that were identified and the points assigned to each of them were: ≥10 days of hospitalization until bacteremia: OR 4.03, 95% CI 1.88-8.66 (2 points); previous antibiotics > 7 days: OR 4.65, 95% CI 2.29-9.46 (2 points); current colonization with KPC-carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales: 33.08, 95% CI 11.74-93.25 (5 points). With a cut-off of 7 points, a sensitivity of 35.59%, specificity of 98.43%, PPV of 77.7%, and NPV of 90.9% were obtained. The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC of 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.91). Finally, the post-test probability of CRE occurrence in patients with none of the risk factors was 1.9%, which would virtually rule out the presence of CRE bacteremia.

RBD-specific polyclonal F(ab´)2 fragments of equine antibodies in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease: A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, adaptive phase 2/3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: passive immunotherapy is a therapeutic alternative for patients with COVID-19. Equine polyclonal antibodies (EpAbs) could represent a source of scalable neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to assess efficacy and safety of EpAbs (INM005) in hospitalized adult patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 pneumonia in 19 hospitals of Argentina. Primary endpoint was improvement in at least two categories in WHO ordinal clinical scale at day 28 or hospital discharge (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04494984). FINDINGS: between August 1st and October 26th, 2020, a total of 245 patients were enrolled. Enrolled patients were assigned to receive two blinded doses of INM005 (n = 118) or placebo (n = 123). Median age was 54 years old, 65•1% were male and 61% had moderate disease at baseline. Median time from symptoms onset to study treatment was 6 days (interquartile range 5 to 8). No statistically significant difference was noted between study groups on primary endpoint (risk difference [95% IC]: 5•28% [-3•95; 14•50]; p = 0•15). Rate of improvement in at least two categories was statistically significantly higher for INM005 at days 14 and 21 of follow-up. Time to improvement in two ordinal categories or hospital discharge was 14•2 (± 0•7) days in the INM005 group and 16•3 (± 0•7) days in the placebo group, hazard ratio 1•31 (95% CI 1•0 to 1•74). Subgroup analyses showed a beneficial effect of INM005 over severe patients and in those with negative baseline antibodies. Overall mortality was 6•9% the INM005 group and 11•4% in the placebo group (risk difference [95% IC]: 0•57 [0•24 to 1•37]). Adverse events of special interest were mild or moderate; no anaphylaxis was reported. INTERPRETATION: Albeit not having reached the primary endpoint, we found clinical improvement of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, particularly those with severe disease.

Evaluación del conocimiento en higiene de manos pre y post capacitación a residentes en un hospital público / Evaluation of hand-hygiene knowledge before and after training of residents in a public hospital

INTRODUCCIÓN: La higiene de las manos se considera la medida más eficaz para reducir las infecciones relacionadas al cuidado de la salud. A partir de enero 2017 se implementó en el Hospital la Estrategia Multimodal de Mejora de la Higiene de Manos (HM), herramienta desarrollada por la OMS. Esta fue adaptada para ser aplicada en nuestra institución, con el objetivo de alcanzar un incremento sostenido de la adherencia a la higiene de manos e implantarla como parte integrante de la cultura de nuestro centro sanitario. El abordaje multimodal incluye acciones a diferentes niveles: sistema (infraestructura), formación y aprendizaje, evaluación y retroalimentación, recordatorios en los lugares de trabajo y clima institucional de mejora en la HM. Dentro de las actividades de formación y aprendizaje se desarrolló una actividad de capacitación a todos los residentes de las áreas médicas y quirúrgicas del HEC. OBJETIVO: El objetivo fue evaluar los conocimientos basales sobre HM entre los residentes del hospital y compararlos luego de recibir un curso de capacitación teórico- práctico específico en la temática. RESULTADOS: Los resultados obtenidos en el examen posterior a la capacitación fueron significativamente superiores a los resultados observados previos a la misma. La intervención realizada y la información recabada permiten reflexionar acerca que el abordaje de una técnica como es la higiene de manos, focalizada en una actividad de capacitación, mejora los conocimientos y formas de llevarlo a la práctica que se tenían previa a esta instancia.

INTRODUCTION: Hand hygiene is considered the most effective measure to reduce healthcarerelated infections. From January 2017, the Multimodal Hand-Hygiene Improvement Strategy, a tool developed by WHO, was implemented in the hospital. This was adapted to be applied in our institution, aiming at achieving a sustained increase of the compliance to hand hygiene and implemented as an integral part of our healthcare center's cultural characteristics. The multimodal approach includes actions at different levels: system (infrastructure), training and learning, evaluation and feedback, reminders at workplaces and institutional climate of HH improvement. A training activity for all residents of the HEC's medical and surgical areas was developed within the training and learning activities. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the basal knowledge on HH among hospital residents, and make a comparison after receiving a training theoretical-practical course that was specific on the subject. RESULTS: The results achieved in the post-training examination were significantly superior to the results observed before the training. The intervention made, and the information collected have allowed us to think that the approach to a technique like hand hygiene, on which a training activity was focused, improves the knowledge and implementation that existed before this instance.

Evaluación de estudios de vigilancia / Assessment of surveillance studies

l Hospital El Cruce de Alta Complejidad en Red funciona como aceptor de derivaciones de pacientes que tuvieron internaciones previas y, en la mayoría de los casos, múltiples tratamientos antibióticos. Por lo cuál, es de vital importancia para poder controlar probable brotes de infección hospitalaria (HI) conocer la flora que portan dichos pacientes.

Comentarios sobre la infección por influenza a H1N1 desde la perspectiva de la terapia intensiva de adultos / Comments on H1N1 influenza infection from the perspective of the adult intensive care

El objetivo del presente fue caracterizar el comportamiento de esta nueva afección en el ámbito de terapia intensiva. Se incluyeron pacientes que ingresaron a la terapia intensiva del hospital y se recorre el tratamiento realizado.

Guía de prevención de neumonía asociada a la ventilación mecánica (NAV) / Guide to prevention of pneumonia associated with mechanical ventilation (VAP)

La neumonía intrahospitalaria es la principal causa de muerte entre las infecciones adquiridas en el hospital. Se estima que la tasa cruda de mortalidad se encuentra en un rango que va desde el 20% al 50%. La mortalidad atribuible es del 30% al 33%. Determinar la exacta contribución de la neumon ía intrahospitalaria a la mortalidad atribuible sigue generando controversias entre los especial istas y puede ser sobrestimada, pues algunas muertes pueden estar relacionadas con la enfe rmedad de base de los pacientes o con el estatus de salud de los mismos.