Implementation of a Rapid Phenotypic Susceptibility Platform for Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections With Paired Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention: Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze?

BACKGROUND: Implementation of the Accelerate PhenoTM Gram-negative platform (RDT) paired with antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) intervention projects to improve time to institutional-preferred antimicrobial therapy (IPT) for Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bloodstream infections (BSIs). However, few data describe the impact of discrepant RDT results from standard of care (SOC) methods on antimicrobial prescribing. METHODS: A single-center, pre-/post-intervention study of consecutive, nonduplicate blood cultures for adult inpatients with GNB BSI following combined RDT + ASP intervention was performed. The primary outcome was time to IPT. An a priori definition of IPT was utilized to limit bias and to allow for an assessment of the impact of discrepant RDT results with the SOC reference standard. RESULTS: Five hundred fourteen patients (PRE 264; POST 250) were included. Median time to antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results decreased 29.4 hours (P < .001) post-intervention, and median time to IPT was reduced by 21.2 hours (P < .001). Utilization (days of therapy [DOTs]/1000 days present) of broad-spectrum agents decreased (PRE 655.2 vs POST 585.8; P = .043) and narrow-spectrum beta-lactams increased (69.1 vs 141.7; P < .001). Discrepant results occurred in 69/250 (28%) post-intervention episodes, resulting in incorrect ASP recommendations in 10/69 (14%). No differences in clinical outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: While implementation of a phenotypic RDT + ASP can improve time to IPT, close coordination with Clinical Microbiology and continued ASP follow up are needed to optimize therapy. Although uncommon, the potential for erroneous ASP recommendations to de-escalate to inactive therapy following RDT results warrants further investigation.

Reducing Repeat Blood Cultures in Febrile Neutropenia: A Single-Center Experience.

Background: Limited data exist to guide blood culture ordering in persistent febrile neutropenia (FN), resulting in substantial variation in practice. Unnecessary repeat blood cultures have been associated with patient harm including increased antimicrobial exposure, hospital length of stay, catheter removal, and overall cost. Methods: We conducted a single-center study of adult hematology-oncology patients with ≥3 days of FN. The yield of blood cultures was first evaluated in a 2-year historical cohort. Additionally, a pilot pre-/postintervention study was performed in non-stem cell transplant (SCT) patients following a change in our population clinical practice guideline from a recommendation of daily blood cultures to a clinically guided approach. The primary outcome was cultures collected per days of FN after day 3 of persistent FN. Results: One hundred forty-six episodes of ≥3 days of FN in 108 patients were identified during the historical period. Day 1 blood cultures were positive in 23 of 146 (16%) episodes. Blood cultures were drawn on 374 of 513 (73%) subsequent episode-days (day 2-12) and were negative in 366 of 374 (98%). After the intervention, a 53% decrease was observed in the rate of total blood cultures collected (1.4 preintervention vs 0.7 postintervention; P = .03). Blood cultures obtained after 48 hours rarely yielded clinically significant organisms. Conclusions: Repeat blood cultures are low-yield in persistent FN without new clinical change. A pilot intervention in non-SCT patients successfully reduced the frequency of blood culture collection.

The effects of avoiding extended antimicrobial drain prophylaxis on Clostridioides difficile and postprocedural infection rates: a 5-year retrospective.

OBJECTIVE: Postprocedural infection is a consequential complication of neurosurgical intervention. Periprocedural antimicrobial prophylaxis is routinely administered to prevent infection, and in some cases, continued for extended periods while surgical drains remain in place. However, there is little evidence that extended antimicrobial administration is necessary to reduce postprocedural infection, and extended antimicrobials can be associated with harm, such as Clostridioides difficile infection. The authors sought to evaluate whether shortening the duration of postprocedural antimicrobial prophylaxis would decrease the incidence of C. difficile infection without increasing the incidence of postprocedural infection. METHODS: In this retrospective study, two general neurosurgical cohorts were examined. In one cohort, postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis was limited to 24 hours; in the other, some patients received extended postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis while surgical drains or external ventricular drains (EVDs) remained in place. Rates of infection with C. difficile as well as postprocedural infection after surgery and EVD placement were compared. RESULTS: Seven thousand two hundred four patients undergoing 8586 surgical procedures and 413 EVD placements were reviewed. The incidence of C. difficile infection decreased significantly from 0.5% per procedural encounter to 0.07% with the discontinuation of extended postprocedural antibiotics within 90 days of a procedure. Rates of postprocedural infection and EVD infection did not significantly change. Results were similar in subgroups of patients with closed suction drains as well as cranial and spine subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation of extended antimicrobial prophylaxis was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of C. difficile infection without a concomitant change in postprocedural infections or EVD-associated infection. This study provides evidence in support of specialtfy-wide discontinuation of extended postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, even in the presence of closed suction drains.

Collaborative Antimicrobial Stewardship for Surgeons.

Antimicrobial stewardship efforts that include surgeons rely on healthy and open communications between surgeons, infectious diseases specialists, and pharmacists. These efforts most frequently are related to surgical prophylaxis, the management of surgical infections, and surgical critical care. Policy should be based on best evidence and timely interactions to develop consensus on how to develop appropriate guidelines and protocols. Flexibility on all sides leads to increasingly strong relationships over time.