Assessing clinical cure of empirical piperacillin/tazobactam for ESBL urinary tract infections (ACCEPT-UTI).

Background: Data are limited regarding use of piperacillin/tazobactam for ESBL urinary tract infections (UTIs). The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients treated empirically with piperacillin/tazobactam versus carbapenems for ESBL UTIs. Methods: This retrospective, observational, propensity score-matched study evaluated adults with an ESBL on urine culture. Patients who had UTI symptoms or leukocytosis, and who received a carbapenem or piperacillin/tazobactam empirically for at least 48 h were included. The primary outcome was clinical success within 48 h, defined as resolution of temperature (36-38°C), resolution of symptoms or leukocytosis (WBC <12 × 103/µL) in the absence of documented symptoms, and the absence of readmission for an ESBL UTI within 6 months. Secondary outcomes included time to clinical resolution, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital and 30 day all-cause mortality. Results: Overall, 223 patients were included in the full cohort and 200 patients in the matched cohort (piperacillin/tazobactam = 100, carbapenem = 100). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. There was no difference in the primary outcome of clinical success between the carbapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam groups (58% versus 56%, respectively; P = 0.76). Additionally, there was no difference in median (IQR) time to clinical resolution [38.9 h (21.5, 50.9 h) versus 40.3 h (27.4, 57.5 h); P = 0.37], in-hospital all-cause mortality (3% versus 3%; P = 1.00), or 30 day all-cause mortality (4% versus 2%; P = 0.68) between the carbapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam groups, respectively. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in clinical success for patients treated empirically with piperacillin/tazobactam compared with carbapenems for ESBL UTIs.

Predictors of dysrhythmias with norepinephrine use in septic shock.

PURPOSE: Norepinephrine (NE) is recommended first-line for treatment of septic shock, partly due to its intrinsically low effect on heart rate. While dysrhythmias secondary to NE are still reported, factors associated with development of this adverse effect have not been described. Our study sought to investigate factors associated with dysrhythmias in patients receiving NE for septic shock. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults receiving NE for septic shock if NE was initiated as the first vasopressor and continued for at least 6 h. The primary objective was to determine the rate of dysrhythmias among this patient population. Secondary objectives included determining the effect of dysrhythmia development on patient outcomes and elucidating predictors for dysrhythmia development. RESULTS: Of the 250 patients included, 34.4% (n = 86) developed a dysrhythmia. These patients had higher mortality (30.5% vs. 63.9%; p < 0.001) with decreased ICU-free days (2 vs. 4; p = 0.04) and ventilator-free days (7 vs. 4; p = 0.048). Duration of NE infusion and maximum NE dose were found to be independently associated with increased rates of dysrhythmia (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: Development of dysrhythmia is associated with increased mortality and is independently associated with longer duration of NE infusion and higher NE doses.

Comparison of Nafcillin and Cefazolin for the Treatment of Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, the antibiotic of choice for Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus related blood stream infections (MSSA-BSI) are the antistaphylococcal penicillins. Cefazolin is considered an alternative agent, with recent evidence showing similar clinical efficacy. This study further evaluates the utility of nafcillin versus cefazolin in MSSA bacteremia including high disease burden sources of infection and its impact on treatment failure. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients admitted to Methodist LeBonheur Healthcare adult hospitals from 2011 to 2016. Patients were included if they received at least 3 days of either nafcillin or cefazolin and had a positive blood culture for MSSA. The primary objective was to evaluate rates of treatment failure between groups. Secondary outcomes included clinical and microbiological cure, MSSA-BSI associated readmissions, identification of risk factors for treatment failure including disease burden, in-hospital and 90 day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 277 patients were included (nafcillin n = 126; cefazolin n = 151). Treatment failure and microbiologic cure were similar between nafcillin and cefazolin (20.6% vs. 16.6%; 91.2% vs. 87.2%, respectively). Clinical cure was significantly higher in the cefazolin treatment arm (93.4 vs. 83.3%; P = 0.012). However, the total number of patients with high disease burden was greater in the nafcillin group (54.8% vs. 39.1%; P = 0.011). Higher rates of in-hospital mortality were observed in the nafcillin group (15.1% vs. 6%; P = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Our study observed significantly higher rates of clinical cure and reduced in-hospital mortality in patients who received cefazolin. Further analysis is warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of these agents and identifying predictors of treatment failure.

Predictors of Hypophosphatemia and Outcomes during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Hypophosphatemia occurs in up to 80% of patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and has been associated with poor outcomes. Whether preemptive phosphate supplementation is warranted in select patients has not been adequately explored. This single-center, retrospective cohort study evaluates predictors of hypophosphatemia and characterizes treatment approaches in adult patients undergoing at least 12 h of CRRT. METHODS: Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the presence or absence of hypophosphatemia as defined by serum phosphorus <2.5 mg/dL. Select laboratory values at baseline and during CRRT, medications and nutritional sources affecting phosphorus, and CRRT parameters were compared. Patient outcomes including resolution of acute kidney injury (AKI), freedom from renal replacement therapy at hospital discharge, duration of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included. The group was 43% female and 51% African American. CRRT was ordered for AKI in 83% and for end-stage renal disease in 15%. Hypophosphatemia occurred in 45 patients (63%). Mean time to development of hypophosphatemia was 34 ± 22 h. Patients who developed hypophosphatemia received a longer duration of CRRT (p = 0.001), were more likely to have a diet ordered (p = 0.005), less likely to have received calcium infusions (p = 0.045), and had lower phosphorus (p = 0.017) and potassium levels (p = 0.038) and higher calcium levels at baseline (p = 0.048). Development of hypophosphatemia was associated with an increased duration of ICU stay (p = 0.014) but not with the other patient outcomes evaluated. Twenty-seven of the 45 patients (60%) who developed hypophosphatemia received phosphorus supplementation with near equal use of intravenous, oral, and combination routes. Only 17 patients (38%) achieved resolution of hypophosphatemia while on CRRT. CONCLUSION: Hypophosphatemia is common, difficult to correct, and contributes to longer ICU stays in patients requiring CRRT. A preemptive approach to address hypophosphatemia including aggressive supplementation strategies to correct phosphorus is warranted in patients requiring CRRT.

Assessing Guideline-Directed Medication Therapy for Heart Failure in End-Stage Renal Disease.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) requires guideline-directed medication therapy (GDMT) consisting of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker in combination with an indicated beta-blocker. There is concern that end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are not being prescribed GDMT. The study aim was to determine whether outcomes differ for patients with HFrEF and ESRD receiving GDMT compared to those not receiving GDMT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients with ESRD and HFrEF admitted to a tertiary teaching hospital over a 2-year period were included. Patients were categorized into GDMT or non-GDMT groups based on their home medications. The length of stay (LOS), mortality, and 30-day hospital readmissions were compared between groups. The incidence of hyperkalemia, hypotension and bradycardia were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were included: 88% African-American, 61% males, median age 63 (28-93) years with 25 in the GDMT group and 84 in the non-GDMT group. The LOS did not differ between the GDMT (5 days; 3-14) compared to the non-GDMT group (7 days; 3-28), P = 0.14. Thirty-day hospital readmission and in-hospital mortality were also similar. Hypotension occurred less frequently in the GDMT group compared to the non-GDMT group, 4% versus 27% (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no differences in the primary outcomes, the shorter LOS in the GDMT group may be clinically significant. The fact that most patients with ESRD and HFrEF were not receiving GDMT is a finding that requires further evaluation.

Pembrolizumab-induced myasthenia gravis: A fatal case report.

Purpose Pembrolizumab, a monoclonal antibody which inhibits the programmed cell death 1 receptor, has been shown to efficaciously enhance pre-existing immune responses to malignancies. However, safety concerns must also be considered as pembrolizumab use has been associated with several life-threatening immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We report a fatal case of pembrolizumab-induced myasthenia gravis in a patient with no prior myasthenia gravis history. Case report A 63-year-old male presented with right eyelid drooping, puffiness, blurred vision, and shortness of breath two weeks after an initial infusion of pembrolizumab. He was subsequently diagnosed with new onset acetylcholine-receptor positive myasthenia gravis. Despite aggressive treatment with corticosteroids, pyridostigmine, intravenous immunoglobulin, and plasmapheresis, the patient clinically deteriorated and ultimately expired from acute respiratory failure after a 12-day hospitalization. Discussion Current package labeling for pembrolizumab warns against various irAEs associated with its use including pneumonitis, colitis, and endocrinopathies. To date, only one case of new onset myasthenia gravis and two case reports of myasthenia gravis exacerbation have been identified. This case further highlights the mortality risk associated with development of irAEs. Conclusion While rare, evidence for the development of MG associated with pembrolizumab is growing. Prompt recognition of symptoms and discontinuation of pembrolizumab is necessary to help improve prognosis.

Choice of Fluids for Resuscitation of the Critically Ill: What Nurses Need to Know.

Fluid administration is one of the most universal interventions in the intensive care unit; however, there remains a lack of optimal fluid choice in clinical practice. With increasing evidence suggesting that the choice and dose of fluid may influence patient outcomes, it is important to have an understanding of the differences between the various fluid products and these potential effects in order for nurses to navigate the critically ill patient. This article reviews properties, adverse effects, and monitoring of commonly used colloid and crystalloid fluids, providing information that may aid in fluid selection in the intensive care unit.

Continuous Infusion Antiepileptic Medications for Refractory Status Epilepticus: A Review for Nurses.

Status epilepticus requires treatment with emergent initial therapy with a benzodiazepine and urgent control therapy with an additional antiepileptic drug (AED) to terminate clinical and/or electrographic seizure activity. However, nearly one-third of patients will prove refractory to the aforementioned therapies and are prone to a higher degree of neuronal injury, resistance to pharmacotherapy, and death. Current guidelines for refractory status epilepticus (RSE) recommend initiating a continuous intravenous (CIV) anesthetic over bolus dosing with a different AED. Continuous intravenous agents most commonly used for this indication include midazolam, propofol, and pentobarbital, but ketamine is an alternative option. Comparative studies illustrating the optimal agent are lacking, and selection is often based on adverse effect profiles and patient-specific factors. In addition, dosing and titration are largely based on small studies and expert opinion with continuous electroencephalogram monitoring used to guide intensity and duration of treatment. Nonetheless, the doses required to halt seizure activity are likely to produce profound adverse effects that clinicians should anticipate and combat. The purpose of this review was to summarize the available RSE literature focusing on CIV midazolam, pentobarbital, propofol, and ketamine, and to serve as a primer for nurses providing care to these patients.

Continuous intravenous antiarrhythmic agents in the intensive care unit: strategies for safe and effective use of amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide.

The development of cardiac arrhythmias in the intensive care unit is common and associated with poor prognoses and outcomes. Because of the complexity of patients admitted to the intensive care unit, the management of arrhythmias is often difficult and may require multiple therapeutic interventions. In order for clinicians to appropriately manage arrhythmias, a thorough understanding of all available therapies, including intravenous antiarrhythmic agents, is essential. Suitable antiarrhythmic agents for use in the critical care setting include amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide. While these agents can be effective in managing cardiac arrhythmias, they also possess significant disadvantages and require additional monitoring during use. Therapy with these agents is often complicated because of the presence of significant associated adverse effects, clinician unfamiliarity, variable dosing strategies, and the potential for drug-drug interactions. The purpose of this review is to discuss indications and strategies for safe and effective use of amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide.