Clinical utility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal PCR to streamline antimicrobial use in treatment of diabetic foot infection with or without osteomyelitis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic Foot Infection (DFI) guidelines recommend empiric methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-targeted therapy in settings where there is high prevalence of MRSA infections or in cases of severe infection; however, they do not provide recommendations for de-escalation. This approach has the potential to increase unnecessary use of broad-spectrum antibiotics; therefore, additional strategies are needed to optimize appropriate antibiotic use. This study evaluates the effect of MRSA nasal PCR testing on MRSA-targeted antibiotic use and clinical outcomes in patients with DFI. METHODS: This was a retrospective quasi-experimental study of patients admitted to South Texas Veterans Health Care System for DFI, with or without osteomyelitis (OM), who had an MRSA nasal PCR and culture data. Eligible patients were identified from the Corporate Data Warehouse and reviewed via electronic health record. Patients were allocated into two groups: PRE (5/1/2019-4/30/2020) and POST (12/1/2020-11/30/2021) protocol implementation for de-escalation or avoidance of MRSA-targeted antibiotics. The primary outcome was median (interquartile range [IQR]) hours of empiric inpatient MRSA-targeted antibiotic therapy. A Wilcoxon Rank Sum test was used to assess the difference between the groups for the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients needing MRSA coverage added back for MRSA after de-escalation, hospital readmission, length of hospital stay (LOS), patient mortality, and acute kidney injury. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were included (83 PRE; 68 POST). Most patients were male (98% PRE; 97% POST) with a median age of 64 (IQR, 56-72) years. Incidence of MRSA in DFI in the cohort was 14.7% overall (12% PRE and 17.6% POST). MRSA was detected via nasal PCR in 12% of patients 15.7% PRE and 7.4% POST). After protocol implementation, there was a significant decrease in empiric MRSA-targeted antibiotic therapy use, from a median of 72 (IQR, 27-120) hours in the PRE group, to 24 (IQR, 12-72) hours in the POST group (p < 0.01). No significant differences were found for other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study of patients presenting to a Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital with DFI identified a statistically significant decrease in median duration of MRSA-targeted antibiotic use post-protocol implementation. This suggests a favorable effect of MRSA nasal PCR for de-escalation or avoidance of MRSA-targeted antibiotics in DFI.

Quantifying Gram-Negative Resistance to Empiric Treatment After Repeat ExpoSure To AntimicRobial Therapy (RESTART).

Background: Antibiotic exposure is a primary predictor of subsequent antibiotic resistance; however, development of cross-resistance between antibiotic classes is also observed. The impact of changing to a different antibiotic from that of previous exposure is not established. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center cohort study of hospitalized adult patients previously exposed to an antipseudomonal ß-lactam (APBL) for at least 48 hours in the 90 days prior to the index infection with a gram-negative bloodstream or respiratory infection. Susceptibility rates to empiric therapy were compared between patients receiving the same (repeat group) versus a different antibiotic from prior exposure (change group). Results: A total of 197 patients were included (n = 94 [repeat group] and n = 103 [change group]). Pathogen susceptibility to empiric therapy was higher in the repeat group compared to the change group (76.6% vs 60.2%; P = .014). After multivariable logistic regression, repeat APBL was associated with an increased likelihood of pathogen susceptibility (adjusted odds ratio, 2.513; P = .012). In contrast, there was no difference in susceptibility rates between the repeat group and the subgroup of change patients who received an empiric APBL (76.6% vs 78.5%; P = .900). Longer APBL exposure duration (P = .012) and chronic kidney disease (P = .002) were associated with higher nonsusceptibility to the exposure APBL. In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the repeat and change groups (18.1% vs 23.3%; P = .368). Conclusions: The common practice of changing to a different APBL from that of recent exposure may not be warranted.