Improving Sepsis Outcomes in the Era of Pay-for-Performance and Electronic Quality Measures: A Joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIDP Position Paper.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) as a pay-for-reporting measure in 2015 and is now planning to make it a pay-for-performance measure by incorporating it into the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. This joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIPD position paper highlights concerns with this change. Multiple studies indicate that SEP-1 implementation was associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic use, lactate measurements, and aggressive fluid resuscitation for patients with suspected sepsis but not with decreased mortality rates. Increased focus on SEP-1 risks further diverting attention and resources from more effective measures and comprehensive sepsis care. We recommend retiring SEP-1 rather than using it in a payment model and shifting instead to new sepsis metrics that focus on patient outcomes. CMS is developing a community-onset sepsis 30-day mortality electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) that is an important step in this direction. The eCQM preliminarily identifies sepsis using systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, antibiotic administrations or diagnosis codes for infection or sepsis, and clinical indicators of acute organ dysfunction. We support the eCQM but recommend removing SIRS criteria and diagnosis codes to streamline implementation, decrease variability between hospitals, maintain vigilance for patients with sepsis but without SIRS, and avoid promoting antibiotic use in uninfected patients with SIRS. We further advocate for CMS to harmonize the eCQM with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Adult Sepsis Event surveillance metric to promote unity in federal measures, decrease reporting burden for hospitals, and facilitate shared prevention initiatives. These steps will result in a more robust measure that will encourage hospitals to pay more attention to the full breadth of sepsis care, stimulate new innovations in diagnosis and treatment, and ultimately bring us closer to our shared goal of improving outcomes for patients.

Adjuvant intra-articular vancomycin for recalcitrant Staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections of the knee.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic prosthetic joint infection patients who fail conventional two-stage revision surgery are an especially difficult to treat patient population. Consequently, the objective of this study was to investigate the safety and long-term effectiveness of adjuvant intra-articular vancomycin therapy in conjunction with two-stage revision knee arthroplasties for recalcitrant Staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of twelve patients with recalcitrant Staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections of the knee which had failed previous revision surgeries. Each patient subsequently underwent two-stage revision with placement of Hickman catheters to deliver intra-articular vancomycin therapy. In addition, systemic antibiotic therapy was administered for 6 weeks, and long-term follow-up was evaluated then for 5 years. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of the cohort have had no recurrence of their infections at 5 years. Two patients formed fistulas requiring above the knee amputations, and three patients had acute kidney injury. All patients had maximum measurable serum vancomycin trough levels that ranged from 6.1 to 93.6 mcg/mL. CONCLUSION: The aggressive protocol used in this cohort with repeat two-stage revision surgery, intra-articular vancomycin and systemic antibiotics was able to prevent recurrence of infection in most patients, but higher than expected rates of acute kidney injury were observed in this study. Therefore, while intra-articular vancomycin therapy may have some effectiveness in treating recalcitrant prosthetic joint infections, its ability to eradicate all bacterial niduses is unproven, and clinicians should be cognizant of potential adverse events that can occur with this therapy.

Patterns, Predictors, and Intercenter Variability in Empiric Gram-Negative Antibiotic Use Across 928 United States Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Empiric antibiotic use among hospitalized adults in the United States (US) is largely undescribed. Identifying factors associated with broad-spectrum empiric therapy may inform antibiotic stewardship interventions and facilitate benchmarking. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults discharged in 2019 from 928 hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. "Empiric" gram-negative antibiotics were defined by administration before day 3 of hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression models with random effects by hospital were used to evaluate associations between patient and hospital characteristics and empiric receipt of broad-spectrum, compared to narrow-spectrum, gram-negative antibiotics. RESULTS: Of 8 017 740 hospitalized adults, 2 928 657 (37%) received empiric gram-negative antibiotics. Among 1 781 306 who received broad-spectrum therapy, 30% did not have a common infectious syndrome present on admission (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, sepsis, or bacteremia), surgery, or an intensive care unit stay in the empiric window. Holding other factors constant, males were 22% more likely (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22 [95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.23]), and all non-White racial groups 6%-13% less likely (aOR range, 0.87-0.94), to receive broad-spectrum therapy. There were significant prescribing differences by region, with the highest adjusted odds of broad-spectrum therapy in the US West South Central division. Even after model adjustment, there remained substantial interhospital variability: Among patients receiving empiric therapy, the probability of receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics varied as much as 34+ percentage points due solely to the admitting hospital (95% interval of probabilities: 43%-77%). CONCLUSIONS: Empiric gram-negative antibiotic use is highly variable across US regions, and there is high, unexplained interhospital variability. Sex and racial disparities in the receipt of broad-spectrum therapy warrant further investigation.

Defining the Optimal Duration of Therapy for Hospitalized Patients With Complicated Urinary Tract Infections and Associated Bacteremia.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available to guide effective antibiotic durations for hospitalized patients with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). METHODS: We conducted an observational study of patients ≥18 years at 24 US hospitals to identify the optimal treatment duration for patients with cUTI. To increase the likelihood patients experienced true infection, eligibility was limited to those with associated bacteremia. Propensity scores were generated for an inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis. The primary outcome was recurrent infection with the same species ≤30 days of completing therapy. RESULTS: 1099 patients met eligibility criteria and received 7 (n = 265), 10 (n = 382), or 14 (n = 452) days of therapy. There was no difference in the odds of recurrent infection for patients receiving 10 days and those receiving 14 days of therapy (aOR: .99; 95% CI: .52-1.87). Increased odds of recurrence was observed in patients receiving 7 days versus 14 days of treatment (aOR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.40-4.60). When limiting the 7-day versus 14-day analysis to the 627 patients who remained on intravenous beta-lactam therapy or were transitioned to highly bioavailable oral agents, differences in outcomes no longer persisted (aOR: .76; 95% CI: .38-1.52). Of 76 patients with recurrent infections, 2 (11%), 2 (10%), and 10 (36%) in the 7-, 10-, and 14-day groups, respectively, had drug-resistant infections (P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Seven days of antibiotics appears effective for hospitalized patients with cUTI when antibiotics with comparable intravenous and oral bioavailability are administered; 10 days may be needed for all other patients.

Early initiation of three-drug combinations for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii among COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who received three-drug combination regimens for treatment of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) infections during a single-centre outbreak. Our objective was to describe the clinical outcomes and molecular characteristics and in vitro synergy of antibiotics against CRAB isolates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted between April and July 2020 with CRAB infections were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical success was defined as resolution of signs/symptoms of infection without need for additional antibiotics. Representative isolates underwent whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and in vitro synergy of two- or three-drug combinations was assessed by checkerboard and time-kill assays, respectively. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with CRAB pneumonia or bacteraemia were included. Treatment regimens included high-dose ampicillin-sulbactam, meropenem, plus polymyxin B (SUL/MEM/PMB; 72%), SUL/PMB plus minocycline (MIN; 17%) or other combinations (12%). Clinical resolution was achieved in 50% of patients and 30-day mortality was 22% (4/18). Seven patients had recurrent infections, during which further antimicrobial resistance to SUL or PMB was not evident. PMB/SUL was the most active two-drug combination by checkerboard. Paired isolates collected before and after treatment with SUL/MEM/PMB did not demonstrate new gene mutations or differences in the activity of two- or three-drug combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Use of three-drug regimens for severe CRAB infections among COVID-19 resulted in high rates of clinical response and low mortality relative to previous studies. The emergence of further antibiotic resistance was not detected phenotypically or through WGS analysis. Additional studies are needed to elucidate preferred antibiotic combinations linked to the molecular characteristics of infecting strains.

In a Pinch: Cefiderocol for CRAB Infections.

Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) can cause significant infections with limited treatment options available. Falcone et al. (https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.02142-21) describe a single-center retrospective study comparing clinical outcomes among patients with CRAB infections treated with cefiderocol-containing versus colistin-containing regimens. Patients who received cefiderocol-containing regimens had lower 30-day mortality, though there are several limitations raised here, which make interpretation and applicability difficult.

Does calculation method matter for targeting vancomycin area under the curve?

OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in vancomycin AUC estimates from two common, clinically applied first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods compared with Bayesian estimates. METHODS: A cohort of patients who received vancomycin and therapeutic drug monitoring was studied. First-order population pharmacokinetic equations were used to guide initial empirical dosing. After receipt of the first dose, patients had peak and trough serum levels drawn and steady-state AUC was estimated using first-order pharmacokinetic equations as standard care. We subsequently created a Bayesian model and used individual Empirical Bayes Estimates to precisely calculate vancomycin AUC24-48, AUC48-72 and AUC72-96 in this cohort. AUC at steady state (AUCSS) differences from the first-order methods were compared numerically and categorically (i.e. below, within or above 400-600 mg·h/L) to Bayesian AUCs, which served as the gold standard. RESULTS: A total of 65 adult inpatients with 409 plasma samples were included in this analysis. A two-compartment intravenous infusion model with first-order elimination fit the data well. The mean of Bayesian AUC24-48 was not significantly different from AUC estimates from the two first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods (P = 0.68); however, Bayesian AUC48-72 and Bayesian AUC72-96 were both significantly different when compared with both first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods (P < 0.01 for each). At the patient level, categorical classifications of AUC estimates from the two first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods differed from categorizations derived from the Bayesian calculations. Categorical agreement was ∼50% between first-order and Bayesian calculations, with declining categorical agreement observed with longer treatment courses. Differences in categorical agreement between calculation methods could potentially result in different dose recommendations for the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Bayesian-calculated AUCs between 48-72 and 72-96 h intervals were significantly different from first-order pharmacokinetic method-estimated AUCs at steady state. The various calculation methods resulted in different categorical classification, which could potentially lead to erroneous dosing adjustments in approximately half of the patients.

A Multicenter Evaluation of Probiotic Use for the Primary Prevention of Clostridioides difficile Infection.

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a priority for hospitals. Probiotics have the potential to interfere with colonization and CDI. In this study, we evaluated the impact of a computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) tool to prescribe probiotics for primary prevention of CDI among adult hospitalized patients. METHODS: A CCDS tool was implemented into the electronic medical record at 4 hospitals to prompt prescription of a probiotic preparation at the time of antibiotic prescription in high-risk patients in May 2019. Interrupted time series using segmented regression analysis was conducted to evaluate hospital-wide CDI incidence for the year pre- and post-CCDS implementation. In addition, multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate CDI incidence in patients who qualified for probiotics in the pre- vs post-intervention periods, adjusting for potential confounders. To adjust for potential differences in patients who received probiotics in the post-intervention period, propensity score-matched pairs were developed to evaluate CDI risk by receipt of probiotics. RESULTS: Quarterly CDI incidence increased over time post-intervention relative to baseline trends (slope change, 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], .9-1.9). The odds ratio (OR) of CDI was 1.41 in eligible patients post-intervention compared with pre-intervention (adjusted OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.79). Propensity score-matched analysis showed that patients who received probiotics did not have lower rates of CDI compared with those who did not receive probiotics (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, .87-2.45). CONCLUSIONS: Use of probiotics for primary prevention of CDI among adult inpatients receiving antibiotics is not supported.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Position Paper: Recommended Revisions to the National Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) Sepsis Quality Measure.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) measure has appropriately established sepsis as a national priority. However, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA and five additional endorsing societies) is concerned about SEP-1's potential to drive antibiotic overuse because it does not account for the high rate of sepsis overdiagnosis and encourages aggressive antibiotics for all patients with possible sepsis, regardless of the certainty of diagnosis or severity of illness. IDSA is also concerned that SEP-1's complex "time zero" definition is not evidence-based and is prone to inter-observer variation. In this position paper, IDSA outlines several recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of unintended consequences of SEP-1 while maintaining focus on its evidence-based elements. IDSA's core recommendation is to limit SEP-1 to septic shock, for which the evidence supporting the benefit of immediate antibiotics is greatest. Prompt empiric antibiotics are often appropriate for suspected sepsis without shock, but IDSA believes there is too much heterogeneity and difficulty defining this population, uncertainty about the presence of infection, and insufficient data on the necessity of immediate antibiotics to support a mandatory treatment standard for all patients in this category. IDSA believes guidance on managing possible sepsis without shock is more appropriate for guidelines that can delineate the strengths and limitations of supporting evidence and allow clinicians discretion in applying specific recommendations to individual patients. Removing sepsis without shock from SEP-1 will mitigate the risk of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for noninfectious syndromes, simplify data abstraction, increase measure reliability, and focus attention on the population most likely to benefit from immediate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics.

New Perspectives on Antimicrobial Agents: Cefiderocol.

Bacterial resistance to carbapenem agents has reached alarming levels. Accordingly, collaborative efforts between national and international organizations and the pharmaceutical industry have led to an impressive expansion of commercially available ß-lactam agents in recent years. No available agent comes close to the broad range of activity afforded by cefiderocol, a novel siderophore-cephalosporin conjugate. The novelty of and need for cefiderocol are clear, but available clinical data are conflicting, leaving infectious diseases specialists puzzled as to when to prescribe this agent in clinical practice. After a brief overview of cefiderocol pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, safety data, cefiderocol susceptibility testing, and putative mechanisms of cefiderocol resistance, this review focuses on determining cefiderocol's role in the management of specific pathogens, including carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii complex, carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, and less commonly identified glucose-nonfermenting organisms such as Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Burkholderia species, and Achromobacter species. Available preclinical, clinical trial, and postmarketing data are summarized for each organism, and each section concludes with our opinions on where to position cefiderocol as a clinical therapeutic.

Evaluation of Linezolid Pharmacokinetics in Critically Ill Obese Patients with Severe Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.

Linezolid standard dosing is fixed at 600 mg every 12 h (q12h) for adults. Literature suggests critically ill, obese patients require higher doses. The study aim is 2-fold: (i) to describe linezolid pharmacokinetics (PK), and (ii) to evaluate if PK/pharmacodynamic (PD) target attainment is achieved with standard dosing in critically ill, obese patients with severe skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). Adult patients with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m2 and receiving intravenous (i.v.) linezolid from August 2018 to April 2019 were eligible for consent in this prospective study. Severe SSTIs were defined as necrotizing fasciitis, myonecrosis, or SSTI with sepsis syndrome. Four blood samples were collected at steady state at 1, 3, 5 h postinfusion and as a trough. Target attainment was defined as achieving area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h to MIC (AUC0-24h/MIC) of ≥100 h*mg/liter. Monte Carlo simulations were used to determine the probability of target attainment (PTA). Eleven patients were included in the study. The median BMI was 45.7 kg/m2, and median total body weight (TBW) was 136.0 kg. Seven patients received standard linezolid doses, and four received 600 mg q8h. A one-compartment model described linezolid PK. Based on AUC0-24h/MIC targets, for noncirrhotic patients at 140 kg, the PTA with standard linezolid doses was 100%, 98.8%, 34.1%, and 0% for MICs of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 mg/liter, respectively. In conclusion, target attainment of ≥90% is not achieved with standard linezolid doses for noncirrhotic patients ≥140 kg with MICs of ≥2 mg/liter. This study adds to accumulating evidence that standard linezolid doses may not be adequate for all patients.

The Impact of Corticosteroids on Secondary Infection and Mortality in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are part of the treatment guidelines for COVID-19 and have been shown to improve mortality. However, the impact corticosteroids have on the development of secondary infection in COVID-19 is unknown. We sought to define the rate of secondary infection in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and determine the effect of corticosteroid use on mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: One hundred and thirty-five critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) at the University of Maryland Medical Center were included in this single-center retrospective analysis. Demographics, symptoms, culture data, use of COVID-19 directed therapies, and outcomes were abstracted from the medical record. The primary outcomes were secondary infection and mortality. Proportional hazards models were used to determine the time to secondary infection and the time to death. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with secondary infection was 63%. The likelihood of developing secondary infection was not significantly impacted by the administration of corticosteroids (HR 1.45, CI 0.75-2.82, P = 0.28). This remained consistent in sub-analysis looking at bloodstream, respiratory, and urine infections. Secondary infection had no significant impact on the likelihood of 28-day mortality (HR 0.66, CI 0.33-1.35, P = 0.256). Corticosteroid administration significantly reduced the likelihood of 28-day mortality (HR 0.27, CI 0.10-0.72, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids are an important and lifesaving pharmacotherapeutic option in critically ill patients with COVID-19, which have no impact on the likelihood of developing secondary infections.

Optimizing Pharmacokinetics-Pharmacodynamics of Antimicrobial Management in Patients with Sepsis: A Review.

Critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock are at an increased risk of death. Early and aggressive interventions are essential for improving clinical outcomes. There are a number of therapeutic and practical challenges in the management of antimicrobials in patients with sepsis. These include the timely selection and administration of appropriate antimicrobials, significant physiological alterations that can influence antimicrobial pharmacokinetics, and significant interpatient variability of antimicrobial concentrations using standard dosing approaches. Understanding the impact of these factors on the probability of attaining pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic target goals is essential to guide optimal therapy. Using rapid diagnostic technology could facilitate timely selection of antimicrobials, and therapeutic drug monitoring would provide a more individualized dosing approach. Using an interdisciplinary sepsis team would also be beneficial in coordinating efforts to overcome the challenges encountered during this critical period to ensure optimal care.

Considerations for Empiric Antimicrobial Therapy in Sepsis and Septic Shock in an Era of Antimicrobial Resistance.

Patients with sepsis present across a spectrum of infection sites and severity of illnesses requiring complex decision making at the bedside as to when prompt antibiotics are indicated and which regimen is warranted. Many hemodynamically stable patients with sepsis and low acuity of illness may benefit from further work up before initiating therapy, whereas patients with septic shock warrant emergent broad-spectrum antibiotics. The precise empiric regimen is determined by assessing patient and epidemiological risk factors, likely source of infection based on presenting signs and symptoms, and severity of illness. Hospitals should implement quality improvement measures to aid in the rapid and accurate diagnosis of septic patients and to ensure antibiotics are given to patients in an expedited fashion after antibiotic order.

A Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamic Approach To Optimize Tazobactam Activity in Critically Ill Patients.

The percentage of the time that the free drug concentration remains above a concentration threshold (%fT > concentration threshold) has frequently been identified to be the optimal pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) target of interest for tazobactam using in vitro infection models. Similar in vitro models suggested that an 85% fT > concentration threshold of 2 µg/ml for tazobactam is required to demonstrate a 2-log10-unit decrease in the number of CFU per milliliter from that at the baseline at 24 h for high-level ß-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli strains. The objective of this study was to characterize the tazobactam concentrations in a cohort of critically ill patients with Gram-negative bacterial infections, determine if traditional dosing regimens achieve a prespecified PK/PD target of an 80% fT > concentration threshold of 2 µg/ml, and propose alternative dosing regimens. Hospitalized critically ill adult patients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP) for a culture-positive Gram-negative bacterial infection were eligible to consent for study inclusion. Two blood samples were drawn, one during the midpoint of the dosing interval and one at the time of the trough concentration once the patient achieved PK steady state. A population PK model was developed using Phoenix NLME (v8.1) software to characterize the observed concentration-time profile of tazobactam, explore potential covariates to explain the variability in the clearance and volume parameters, and to simulate potential dosing regimens that would achieve the PK/PD target. The PK of tazobactam were adequately described by a one-compartment model with first-order elimination in 18 patients who provided consent. The final model incorporated creatinine clearance as a covariate on clearance. Simulations demonstrated target attainments of less than 50% for tazobactam using traditional dosing regimens (4/0.5 g over 30 min every 6 h). Target attainments of greater than 75% were achieved when using extended infusion times of 4 to 6 h or when administering TZP as a continuous infusion (16/2 g over 24 h). Traditional tazobactam dosing regimens fail to achieve conservative PK/PD targets in critically ill patients. Increases in the tazobactam dose or prolongation of the infusion rate may be warranted to achieve activity against ß-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria.

A Propensity Score Matched Study of the Positive Impact of Infectious Diseases Consultation on Antimicrobial Appropriateness in Hospitalized Patients with Antimicrobial Stewardship Oversight.

Hospital-based antibiotic stewardship (AS) programs provide oversight and guidance for appropriate antimicrobial use in acute care settings. Infectious disease expertise is beneficial in the care of hospitalized patients with infections. The impact of infectious diseases consultation (IDC) on antimicrobial appropriateness in a large tertiary hospital with an established AS program was investigated. This was a cross-sectional study from October 2017 to March 2019 at a large academic hospital with an AS-directed prospective audit and feedback process and multiple IDC services. Antimicrobial appropriateness was adjudicated by an AS team member after antimicrobial start. Antimicrobial appropriateness was compared among antimicrobial orders with and without IDC using propensity score matching and multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were stratified by primary services caring for the patients. There were 10,508 antimicrobial orders from 6,165 unique patient encounters. Overall appropriateness was 92%, with higher appropriateness among patients with IDC versus without IDC (94% versus 84%; P < 0.0001). After propensity score matching and adjustment for certain antibiotics, organisms, syndromes, and locations, IDC was associated with a greater antimicrobial appropriateness odds ratio (OR) of 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9 to 3.0). Stratification by primary service showed an OR of 2.9 (95% CI, 2.1 to 3.8) for surgical specialties and an OR of 1.6 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.2) for medical specialties. Even with a high overall antimicrobial appropriateness, patients with IDC had greater odds of antimicrobial appropriateness than those without IDC, and this impact was greater in surgical specialties. Infectious diseases consultation can be synergistic with antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Clinical outcomes of valganciclovir prophylaxis in high-risk (D+/R-) renal transplant recipients experiencing delayed graft function.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) outcomes with valganciclovir prophylaxis in renal transplant recipients experiencing delayed graft function (DGF) are unclear. METHODS: This single center, retrospective, cohort study of CMV high-risk (D+/R- with alemtuzumab induction) deceased donor renal transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir prophylaxis assessed CMV outcomes in patients experiencing DGF (n = 72) versus those with immediate graft function (IGF; n = 66). RESULTS: Cytomegalovirus viremia by 12 months occurred at similar rates in the IGF and DGF groups (30.3% vs 26.4%, respectively, P = 0.71) with 89.7% (35/39) of all cases classified as CMV disease. The median time to CMV viremia post transplant was day 141 and 138 in the IGF and DGF groups, respectively (P = 0.30). The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) was higher in the DGF group (18.1% vs 4.6%, P = 0.02) with BPAR preceding CMV in only 1 patient. There was no significant difference in graft loss (1.5% vs 4.2%, P = 0.62) or patient survival (98.5% vs 95.8%, P = 0.62) at 1 year between the IGF and DGF groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Valganciclovir prophylaxis in patients experiencing DGF yielded similar CMV outcomes up to 1-year post transplant when compared to use in patients with IGF.

Pharmacodynamic Target Attainment for Cefepime, Meropenem, and Piperacillin-Tazobactam Using a Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic-Based Dosing Calculator in Critically Ill Patients.

This was a prospective study to determine if pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD)-based antibiotic dosing software aids in achieving concentration targets in critically ill patients receiving cefepime (n = 10), meropenem (n = 20), or piperacillin-tazobactam (n = 19). Antibiotic calculator doses targeting a >90% probability of target attainment (PTA) differed from package insert doses for 22.4% (11/49) of patients. Target attainment was achieved for 98% of patients (48/49). A PK/PD-based antibiotic dosing calculator provides beta-lactam doses with a high PTA in critically ill patients.