It is not known whether sequential outpatient parenteral antimicrobial (OPAT) is as safe and effective as conventional hospitalization in patients with S. aureus bacteremia (SAB). A post-hoc analysis of the comparative effectiveness of conventional hospitalization versus sequential OPAT was performed in two prospective Spanish cohorts of patients with S. aureus bacteremia. The PROBAC cohort is a national, multicenter, prospective observational cohort of patients diagnosed in 22 Spanish hospitals between October 2016 and March 2017. The DOMUS OPAT cohort is a prospective observational cohort including patients from two university hospitals in Seville, Spain from 2012 to 2021. Multivariate regression was performed, including a propensity score (PS) for receiving OPAT, stratified analysis according to PS quartiles, and matched pair analyses based on PS. Four hundred and thirteen patients were included in the analysis: 150 in sequential OPAT and 263 in the full hospitalization therapy group. In multivariate analysis, including PS and center effect as covariates, 60-day treatment failure was lower in the OPAT group than in the full hospitalization group (p < 0.001; OR 0.275, 95%CI 0.129−0.584). In the PS-based matched analyses, sequential treatment under OPAT was not associated with higher 60-day treatment failure (p = 0.253; adjusted OR 0.660; % CI 0.324−1.345). OPAT is a safe and effective alternative to conventional in-patient therapy for completion of treatment in well-selected patients with SAB, mainly those associated with a low-risk source and without end-stage kidney disease.
Cefazolin is a recommended treatment for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections that has been successfully used in outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) programs. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes of cefazolin delivered each day (Group 24) vs. every two days (Group 48) for MSSA infections in OPAT programs. It was a prospective observational study with retrospective analysis of a cohort of MSSA infections attended in OPAT. The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as completing the antimicrobial regimen without death, treatment discontinuation, or readmission during treatment and follow-up. A univariate and multivariate logistic regression model was built. A two-sided p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Of the 149 MSSA infections treated with cefazolin 2 g/8 h in OPATs, 94 and 55 patients were included in the delivery Group 24 and Group 48, respectively. Treatment failure and unplanned readmission rates were similar in both groups (11.7% vs. 7.3% p = 0.752 and 8.5% vs. 5.5% p = 0.491). There was a significant increase in vascular access complications in Group 24 (33.0%) with respect to Group 48 (7.3%) (p < 0.001). Treating uncomplicated MSSA infection with cefazolin home-delivered every two days through an OPAT program is not associated with an increased risk of treatment failure and entails a significant reduction in resource consumption compared to daily delivery.
Introduction: The use of systemic corticosteroids in severely ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid pulses in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: A quasi-experimental study, before and after, was performed in a tertiary referral hospital, including admitted patients showing COVID-19-associated pneumonia. The standard treatment protocol included targeted COVID-19 antiviral therapy from 23rd March 2020, and additionally pulses of methylprednisolone from 30th March 2020. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint combining oro-tracheal intubation (OTI) and death within 7 days. Results: A total of 24 patients were included. Standard of care (SOC) (before intervention) was prescribed in 14 patients, while 10 received SOC plus pulses of methylprednisolone (after intervention). The median age of patients was 64.5 years and 83.3% of the patients were men. The primary composite endpoint occurred in 13 patients (92.9%) who received SOC vs. 2 patients (20%) that received pulses of methylprednisolone (odds ratio, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.001 to 0.25; p = 0.019). Length of hospitalization in survivors was shorter in the corticosteroids group (median, 14.5 [8.5-21.8] days vs. 29 [23-31] days, p = 0.003). There were no differences in the development of infections between both groups. There were 3 deaths, none of them in the corticosteroids group. Conclusions: In patients with severe pneumonia due to COVID-19, the administration of methylprednisolone pulses was associated with a lower rate of OTI and/or death and a shorter hospitalization episode.
Introducción: El uso de corticosteroides sistémicos en pacientes gravemente enfermos por enfermedad coronavírica de 2019 (covid-19) es controvertido. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar la eficacia y la seguridad de los pulsos de corticoesteroides en los pacientes con neumonía por covid-19. Métodos: Se realizó un ensayo cuasiexperimental, tipo antes y después, en un hospital terciario de referencia que incluyó a pacientes ingresados por neumonía asociada a covid-19. El protocolo de tratamiento estándar incluía un tratamiento antiviral dirigido contra el virus de la covid-19 desde el 23 de marzo de 2020 y añadió pulsos de metilprednisolona desde el 30 de marzo de 2020. El resultado primario fue un criterio combinado compuesto por la intubación orotraqueal y el fallecimiento durante los siguientes siete días. Resultados: Se incluyó un total de 24 pacientes. El protocolo de tratamiento (antes de la intervención) se prescribió en 14 pacientes, mientras que 10 recibieron el protocolo de tratamiento además de los pulsos de metilprednisolona (después de la intervención). La edad media de los pacientes fue de 64,5 años y el 83,3% de los pacientes eran hombres. El resultado combinado primario tuvo lugar en 13 pacientes (92,9%) que recibieron el protocolo de tratamiento frente a 2 pacientes (20%) que recibieron los pulsos de metilprednisolona (odds ratio = 0,02; intervalo de confianza del 95% = 0,001-0,25; p = 0,019). La duración de la hospitalización en los supervivientes fue más corta en el grupo que recibió corticoesteroides (media = 14,5 [8,5-21,8] días frente a 29 [23-31] días, p = 0,003). No hubo diferencias en el desarrollo de infecciones entre ambos grupos. Hubo tres fallecimientos, ninguno de ellos en el grupo que recibió corticoesteroides. Conclusiones: En los pacientes con neumonía grave por covid-19, la administración de pulsos de metilprednisolona se asoció a unas tasas menores de intubación orotraqueal y/o muerte y a episodios de hospitalización más cortos.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship strategies has been recommended. This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary care Spanish hospital with an active ongoing antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP). For a 20-week period, we weekly assessed antimicrobial consumption, incidence density, and crude death rate per 1000 occupied bed days of candidemia and multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial bloodstream infections (BSI). We conducted a segmented regression analysis of time series. Antimicrobial consumption increased +3.5% per week (p = 0.016) for six weeks after the national lockdown, followed by a sustained weekly reduction of -6.4% (p = 0.001). The global trend for the whole period was stable. The frequency of empirical treatment of patients with COVID-19 was 33.7%. No change in the global trend of incidence of hospital-acquired candidemia and MDR bacterial BSI was observed (+0.5% weekly; p = 0.816), nor differences in 14 and 30-day crude death rates (p = 0.653 and p = 0.732, respectively). Our work provides quantitative data about the pandemic effect on antimicrobial consumption and clinical outcomes in a centre with an active ongoing institutional and education-based ASP. However, assessing the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antimicrobial resistance is required.
