RESUMEN
SCOPE: This European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to support a selection of appropriate antibiotic use practices for patients seen in the emergency department (ED) and guidance for their implementation. The topics addressed in this guideline are (a) Do biomarkers or rapid pathogen tests improve antibiotic prescribing and/or clinical outcomes? (b) Does taking blood cultures in common infectious syndromes improve antibiotic prescribing and/or clinical outcomes? (c) Does watchful waiting without antibacterial therapy or with delayed antibiotic prescribing reduce antibiotic prescribing without worsening clinical outcomes in patients with specific infectious syndromes? (d) Do structured culture follow-up programs in patients discharged from the ED with cultures pending improve antibiotic prescribing? METHODS: An expert panel was convened by European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases and the guideline chair. The panel selected in consensus the four most relevant antimicrobial stewardship topics according to pre-defined relevance criteria. For each main question for the four topics, a systematic review was performed, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Both clinical outcomes and stewardship process outcomes related to antibiotic use were deemed relevant. The literature searches were conducted between May 2021 and March 2022. In April 2022, the panel members were formally asked to suggest additional studies that were not identified in the initial searches. Data were summarized in a meta-analysis if possible or otherwise summarized narratively. The certainty of the evidence was classified according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. The guideline panel reviewed the evidence per topic critically appraising the evidence and formulated recommendations through a consensus-based process. The strength of the recommendations was classified as strong or weak. To substantiate the implementation process, implementation trials or observational studies describing facilitators/barriers for implementation were identified from the same searches and were summarized narratively. RECOMMENDATIONS: The recommendations on the use of biomarkers and rapid pathogen diagnostic tests focus on the initiation of antibiotics in patients admitted through the ED. Their effect on the discontinuation or de-escalation of antibiotics during hospital stay was not reported, neither was their effect on hospital infection prevention and control practices. The recommendations on watchful waiting (i.e. withholding antibiotics with some form of follow-up) focus on specific infectious syndromes for which the primary care literature was also included. The recommendations on blood cultures focus on the indication in three common infectious syndromes in the ED explicitly excluding patients with sepsis or septic shock. Most recommendations are based on very low and low certainty of evidence, leading to weak recommendations or, when no evidence was available, to best practice statements. Implementation of these recommendations needs to be adapted to the specific settings and circumstances of the ED. The scarcity of high-quality studies in the area of antimicrobial stewardship in the ED highlights the need for future research in this field.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Isavuconazole is a relatively new antifungal agent indicated for the management of various invasive fungal diseases (IFDs), including invasive aspergillosis. Information on real-world experience with isavuconazole is scarce. This retrospective observational study aimed to describe the usage of isavuconazole in clinical practice with an in-depth evaluation of individual isavuconazole exposure. METHODS: Patients treated with isavuconazole were evaluated based on retrospective data, including therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) data and efficacy and safety data. Additionally, we calculated the individual isavuconazole exposure described by the average AUC24 over the first 7â days of treatment by means of non-linear mixed-effects modelling and compared this with the currently desired lower target AUC of 60â mg·h/L. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients treated with isavuconazole were evaluated. In our real-life cohort, isavuconazole was often deployed off-label in patients with non-classical host factors and infections with non-Aspergillus and non-Mucorales species. Isavuconazole was most often chosen for its safety profile, even after prior triazole treatment with manifestations of toxicity. TDM and subsequent dosage adjustments were frequently performed. The individual average AUC24 over 7â days was above 60â mg·h/L in 29 out of 77 (37.7%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: This overview provides practical insights that can aid clinicians in the management of their patients with IFD. Our study shows that isavuconazole was used in a diverse patient population and was well tolerated overall. Individual isavuconazole exposure reflected by the average AUC24 over the first 7 days of treatment was generally low and variable. Dosage adjustments following TDM were frequently performed. Our experience shows that isavuconazole is a feasible alternative after prior azole treatment.
Asunto(s)
Antifúngicos , Infecciones Fúngicas Invasoras , Nitrilos , Piridinas , Triazoles , Humanos , Piridinas/uso terapéutico , Piridinas/efectos adversos , Piridinas/administración & dosificación , Triazoles/uso terapéutico , Triazoles/efectos adversos , Triazoles/administración & dosificación , Nitrilos/uso terapéutico , Nitrilos/efectos adversos , Nitrilos/administración & dosificación , Antifúngicos/uso terapéutico , Antifúngicos/efectos adversos , Antifúngicos/administración & dosificación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Infecciones Fúngicas Invasoras/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Fúngicas Invasoras/prevención & control , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Adulto , Monitoreo de Drogas , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Introduction: Sudden onset of reduced consciousness, psychomotor agitation and mydriasis are all indicative of an anticholinergic toxidrome. It is important to note that numerous drugs, as well as certain herbs and plants, possess anticholinergic properties. Case description: An 84-year-old female patient had sudden nocturnal onset of uncoordinated hand movements and altered mental status. Shortly after, the patient's 83-year-old husband developed symptoms of dysarthria, gait ataxia, vertigo, and delirium. Conclusion: Anticholinergic syndrome consists of a combination of central and peripheral anticholinergic symptoms. Physostigmine given intravenously resulted in rapid reversal of symptoms. Thorn apple seeds had been accidentally ingested and were identified as the cause. LEARNING POINTS: The clinical presentation of an anticholinergic toxidrome includes both central and peripheral symptoms such as altered consciousness, mydriasis, dry mucous membranes and skin, and tachycardia.Prompt recognition of anticholinergic toxidrome and the administration of physostigmine can lead to rapid reversal of symptoms and improved patient outcomes.Treatment with physostigmine is indicated when a patient with an agitated delirium does not respond adequately to titrated benzodiazepines.
RESUMEN
Over the past century, antibiotic usage has skyrocketed in the treatment of critically ill patients. There have been increasing calls to establish guidelines for appropriate treatment and durations of antibiosis. Antibiotic treatment, even when appropriately tailored to the patient and infection, is not without cost. Short term risks-hepatic/renal dysfunction, intermediate effects-concomitant superinfections, and long-term risks-potentiating antimicrobial resistance (AMR), are all possible consequences of antimicrobial administration. These risks are increased by longer periods of treatment and unnecessarily broad treatment courses. Recently, the literature has focused on multiple strategies to determine the appropriate duration of antimicrobial therapy. Further, there is a clinical shift to multi-modal approaches to determine the most suitable timepoint at which to end an antibiotic course. An approach utilising biomarker assays and an inter-disciplinary team of pharmacists, nurses, physicians, and microbiologists appears to be the way forward to develop sound clinical decision-making surrounding antibiotic treatment.
RESUMEN
Background: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), the set of actions to ensure antibiotics are used appropriately, is increasingly targeted at all those involved in the antimicrobial pathway, including nurses. Several healthcare organizations have issued position statements on how bedside nurses can be involved in AMS. However, it remains unclear how nurses, in reality, contribute to appropriate antibiotic use. Objectives: To systematically search the literature to describe the activities bedside nurses perform regarding antibiotic use in daily clinical practice, in relation to the activities proposed by the aforementioned position statements. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and grey literature until March 2021. Studies were included if they described activities regarding antibiotic use performed by bedside nurses. Methodological rigour was assessed by applying the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Results: A total of 118 studies were included. The majority of the proposed nurses' activities were found in daily practice, categorized into assessment of clinical status, collection of specimens, management of antimicrobial medication, prompting review and educating patient and relatives. Nurses may take the lead in these clinical processes and are communicators in all aspects of the antimicrobial pathway. Patient advocacy appears to be a strong driver of bedside nurses' activities. Conclusions: Nurses' activities are already integrated in the day-to-day nursing practice and are grounded in the essence of nursing, being a patient advocate and showing nursing leadership in safeguarding the antimicrobial treatment process. An essential element of the nursing role is communication with other stakeholders in the patient-centred antimicrobial pathway. Educating, engaging and empowering nurses in this already integrated role, could lead to a solid, impactful nursing contribution to AMS.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Isavuconazole is a broad-spectrum antifungal agent for the management of invasive fungal disease. Optimised drug exposure is critical for patient outcomes, specifically in the critically ill population. Solid information on isavuconazole pharmacokinetics including protein binding in patients in the intensive care unit is scarce. We aimed to describe the total and unbound isavuconazole pharmacokinetics and subsequently propose a dosage optimisation strategy. METHODS: A prospective multi-centre study in adult intensive care unit patients receiving isavuconazole was performed. Blood samples were collected on eight timepoints over one dosing interval between days 3-7 of treatment and optionally on one timepoint after discontinuation. Total and unbound isavuconazole pharmacokinetics were analysed by means of population pharmacokinetic modelling using NONMEM. The final model was used to perform simulations to assess exposure described by the area under the concentration-time curve and propose an adaptive dosing approach. RESULTS: Population pharmacokinetics of total and unbound isavuconazole were best described by an allometrically scaled two-compartment model with a saturable protein-binding model and interindividual variability on clearance and the maximum binding capacity. The median (range) isavuconazole unbound fraction was 1.65% (0.83-3.25%). After standard dosing, only 35.8% of simulated patients reached a total isavuconazole area under the concentration-time curve > 60 mg·h/L at day 14. The proposed adaptive dosing strategy resulted in an increase to 62.3% of patients at adequate steady-state exposure. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients, total isavuconazole exposure is reduced and protein binding is highly variable. We proposed an adaptive dosing approach to enhance early treatment optimisation in this high-risk population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04777058.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Enfermedad Crítica , Adulto , Humanos , Antibacterianos/farmacocinética , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Triazoles/farmacocinéticaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Antibiotic therapy is commonly prescribed longer than recommended in intensive care patients (ICU). We aimed to provide insight into the decision-making process on antibiotic therapy duration in the ICU. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted, involving direct observations of antibiotic decision-making during multidisciplinary meetings in four Dutch ICUs. The study used an observation guide, audio recordings, and detailed field notes to gather information about the discussions on antibiotic therapy duration. We described the participants' roles in the decision-making process and focused on arguments contributing to decision-making. RESULTS: We observed 121 discussions on antibiotic therapy duration in sixty multidisciplinary meetings. 24.8% of discussions led to a decision to stop antibiotics immediately. In 37.2%, a prospective stop date was determined. Arguments for decisions were most often brought forward by intensivists (35.5%) and clinical microbiologists (22.3%). In 28.9% of discussions, multiple healthcare professionals participated equally in the decision. We identified 13 main argument categories. While intensivists mostly used arguments based on clinical status, clinical microbiologists used diagnostic results in the discussion. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary decision-making regarding the duration of antibiotic therapy is a complex but valuable process, involving different healthcare professionals, using a variety of argument-types to determine the duration of antibiotic therapy. To optimize the decision-making process, structured discussions, involvement of relevant specialties, and clear communication and documentation of the antibiotic plan are recommended.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Cuidados Críticos , Investigación Cualitativa , Toma de DecisionesRESUMEN
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the detrimental effect of secondary pathogens in patients with a primary viral insult. In addition to superinfections with bacterial pathogens, invasive fungal infections were increasingly reported. The diagnosis of pulmonary fungal infections has always been challenging; however, it became even more problematic in the setting of COVID-19, particularly regarding the interpretation of radiological findings and mycology test results in patients with these infections. Moreover, prolonged hospitalization in ICU, coupled with underlying host factors. such as preexisting immunosuppression, use of immunomodulatory agents, and pulmonary compromise, caused additional vulnerability to fungal infections in this patient population. In addition, the heavy workload, redeployment of untrained staff, and inconsistent supply of gloves, gowns, and masks during the COVID-19 outbreak made it harder for healthcare workers to strictly adhere to preventive measures for infection control. Taken together, these factors favored patient-to-patient spread of fungal infections, such as those caused by Candida auris, or environment-to-patient transmission, including nosocomial aspergillosis. As fungal infections were associated with increased morbidity and mortality, empirical treatment was overly used and abused in COVID-19-infected patients, potentially contributing to increased resistance in fungal pathogens. The aim of this paper was to focus on essential elements of antifungal stewardship in COVID-19 for three fungal infections, COVID-19-associated candidemia (CAC), -pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA), and -mucormycosis (CAM).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Candidemia , Humanos , Antifúngicos/uso terapéutico , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pandemias , Candidemia/tratamiento farmacológico , HongosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak is a severe complication after oesophagectomy. Anastomotic leak has diverse clinical manifestations and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of treatment strategies for different manifestations of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in 71 centres worldwide and included patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy (2011-2019). Different primary treatment strategies were compared for three different anastomotic leak manifestations: interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (that is no intrathoracic collections; well perfused conduit); drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations; and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Of 1508 patients with anastomotic leak, 28.2 per cent (425 patients) had local manifestations, 36.3 per cent (548 patients) had intrathoracic manifestations, 9.6 per cent (145 patients) had conduit ischaemia/necrosis, 17.5 per cent (264 patients) were allocated after multiple imputation, and 8.4 per cent (126 patients) were excluded. After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in 90-day mortality were found regarding interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (risk difference 3.2 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.8 to 8.2 per cent), drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations (risk difference 5.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.2 to 12.8 per cent), and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis (risk difference 0.1 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -21.4 to 1.6 per cent). In general, less morbidity was found after less extensive primary treatment strategies. CONCLUSION: Less extensive primary treatment of anastomotic leak was associated with less morbidity. A less extensive primary treatment approach may potentially be considered for anastomotic leak. Future studies are needed to confirm current findings and guide optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.
Asunto(s)
Fuga Anastomótica , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Humanos , Anastomosis Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Fuga Anastomótica/etiología , Fuga Anastomótica/cirugía , Estudios de Cohortes , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Neoplasias Esofágicas/complicaciones , Esofagectomía/efectos adversos , Isquemia/cirugía , Necrosis/complicaciones , Necrosis/cirugía , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in ICU patients. We investigated the incidence of, risk factors for and potential benefit of a pre-emptive screening strategy for CAPA in ICUs in the Netherlands/Belgium during immunosuppressive COVID-19 treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, observational, multicentre study was performed from September 2020-April 2021 including patients admitted to the ICU who had undergone diagnostics for CAPA. Patients were classified based on 2020 ECMM/ISHAM consensus criteria. RESULTS: CAPA was diagnosed in 295/1977 (14.9%) patients. Corticosteroids were administered to 97.1% of patients and interleukin-6 inhibitors (anti-IL-6) to 23.5%. EORTC/MSGERC host factors or treatment with anti-IL-6 with or without corticosteroids were not risk factors for CAPA. Ninety-day mortality was 65.3% (145/222) in patients with CAPA compared to 53.7% (176/328) without CAPA (p = 0.008). Median time from ICU admission to CAPA diagnosis was 12 days. Pre-emptive screening for CAPA was not associated with earlier diagnosis or reduced mortality compared to a reactive diagnostic strategy. CONCLUSIONS: CAPA is an indicator of a protracted course of a COVID-19 infection. No benefit of pre-emptive screening was observed, but prospective studies comparing pre-defined strategies would be required to confirm this observation.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Aspergilosis Pulmonar , Humanos , Incidencia , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences. METHODS: TENTACLE - Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20-60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment. RESULTS: FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5-1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4-1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5-1.4). CONCLUSION: Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission.
Asunto(s)
Fuga Anastomótica , Esofagectomía , Humanos , Fuga Anastomótica/epidemiología , Esofagectomía/efectos adversos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
At the 2015 World Health Assembly, UN member states adopted a resolution that committed to the development of national action plans (NAPs) for antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The political determination to commit to NAPs and the availability of robust governance structures to assure sustainable translation of the identified NAP objectives from policy to practice remain major barriers to progress. Inter-country variability in economic and political resilience and resource constraints could be fundamental barriers to progressing AMR NAPs. Although there have been regional and global analyses of NAPs from a One Health and policy perspective, a global assessment of the NAP objectives targeting antimicrobial use in human populations is needed. In this Health Policy, we report a systematic evidence synthesis of existing NAPs that are aimed at tackling AMR in human populations. We find marked gaps and variability in maturity of NAP development and operationalisation across the domains of: (1) policy and strategic planning; (2) medicines management and prescribing systems; (3) technology for optimised antimicrobial prescribing; (4) context, culture, and behaviours; (5) operational delivery and monitoring; and (6) patient and public engagement and involvement. The gaps identified in these domains highlight opportunities to facilitate sustainable delivery and operationalisation of NAPs. The findings from this analysis can be used at country, regional, and global levels to identify AMR-related priorities that are relevant to infrastructure needs and contexts.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Antiinfecciosos , Humanos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana , Política de Salud , Salud GlobalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) teams are responsible for performing an AMS programme in their hospitals that aims to improve the quality of antibiotic use. Measuring the quality of antimicrobial use is a core task of a stewardship team. Measurement provides insight into the current quality of antibiotic use and allows for the establishment of goals for improvement. Yet, a practical description of how such a quality measurement using quality indicators (QIs) should be performed is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To provide practical guidance on how a stewardship team can use QIs to measure the quality of antibiotic use in their hospital and identify targets for improvement. SOURCES: General principles from implementation science, peer-reviewed publications, and experience from clinicians and researchers with AMS experience. CONTENT: We provide step-by-step guidance on how AMS teams can use QIs to measure the quality of antibiotic use. The principles behind each step are explained and illustrated with the description and results of an audit of patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy in four Dutch hospitals. IMPLICATIONS: Improving the quality of antibiotic use is impossible without first gaining insight into that quality by performing a measurement with validated QIs. This step-by-step practice example of how to use quality indicators in a hospital will help AMS teams to identify targets for improvement. This enables them to perform their AMS programme more effectively and efficiently.
Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Humanos , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Antiinfecciosos/uso terapéutico , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , HospitalesRESUMEN
In 2015, 196 countries formally committed to a Global Action Plan to address antimicrobial resistance (AMR). However, translating policy into practice is not happening at pace and the recent Global Research on AntiMicrobial resistance (GRAM) Project report confirms the burden of AMR is increasing. Despite progress in establishing surveillance data and investment in new antimicrobials, education and training including use of behavioural science approaches to change practice is lagging. To contribute to addressing this, we have invited organizations to join us as founding members of the Global Antimicrobial Stewardship Partnership Hub (GASPH) (https://global-asp-hub.com/). We will work together to share education resources and foster collaboration to meet the needs of learners and of partner organizations working on tackling AMR. Membership is open to all-professional societies, academic institutes, nongovernmental organizations/civil society, philanthropists and commercial partners interested in supporting a multi-stakeholder global antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) education platform and network.
RESUMEN
This nationwide study assessed how outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is organised by Dutch acute care hospitals, the barriers experienced, and how an OPAT program affects the way hospitals organised OPAT care. We systematically developed and administered a survey to all 71 Dutch acute care hospitals between November 2021 and February 2022. Analyses were primarily descriptive and included a comparison between hospitals with and without an OPAT program. Sixty of the 71 hospitals (84.5%) responded. Fifty-five (91.7%) performed OPAT, with a median number of 20.8 (interquartile range [IQR] 10.3-29.7) patients per 100 hospital beds per year. Of these 55 hospitals, 31 (56.4%) had selection criteria for OPAT and 34 (61.8%) had a protocol for laboratory follow-up. Sixteen hospitals (29.1%) offered self-administered OPAT (S-OPAT), with a median percentage of 5.0% of patients (IQR: 2.3%-10.0%) actually performing self-administration. Twenty-five hospitals (45.5%) had an OPAT-related outcome registration. The presence of an OPAT program (22 hospitals, 40.0%) was significantly associated with aspects of well-organised OPAT care. The most commonly experienced barriers to OPAT implementation were a lack of financial, administrative, and IT support and insufficient time of healthcare staff. Concluding, hospital-initiated OPAT is widely available in the Netherlands, but various aspects of well-organised OPAT care can be improved. Implementation of a team-based OPAT program can contribute to such improvements. The observed variation provides leads for further scientific research, guidelines, and practical implementation programs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) in collaboration with relevant professional societies, has updated their evidence-based guidelines on empiric antibacterial therapy of sepsis in adults. METHODS: Our multidisciplinary guideline committee generated ten population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) questions relevant for adult patients with sepsis. For each question, a literature search was performed to obtain the best available evidence and assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The quality of evidence for clinically relevant outcomes was graded from high to very low. In structured consensus meetings, the committee formulated recommendations as strong or weak. When evidence could not be obtained, recommendations were provided based on expert opinion and experience (good practice statements). RESULTS: Fifty-five recommendations on the antibacterial therapy of sepsis were generated. Recommendations on empiric antibacterial therapy choices were differentiated for sepsis according to the source of infection, the potential causative pathogen and its resistance pattern. One important revision was the distinction between low, increased and high risk of infection with Enterobacterales resistant to third generation cephalosporins (3GRC-E) to guide the choice of empirical therapy. Other new topics included empirical antibacterial therapy in patients with a reported penicillin allergy and the role of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics to guide dosing in sepsis. We also established recommendations on timing and duration of antibacterial treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our multidisciplinary committee formulated evidence-based recommendations for the empiric antibacterial therapy of adults with sepsis in The Netherlands.