Meropenem antimicrobial stewardship program: clinical, economic, and antibiotic resistance impact

Background. There are few prospective studies with sufficient duration in time to evaluate clinical and antibiotic resistance impact of Antibiotic Stewardship Programs (ASP). Methods. Descriptive study between January-2012 to December-2017, pre-postintervention. An meropenem ASP was initiated in January 2015, in patients who started treatment with meropenem an infectious diseases physician performed treatment recommendations to prescribers. Prospective information was collected to evaluate adequacy of meropenem prescription to local guidelines and to compare results between cases with accepted or rejected intervention. Analysis was performed to verify variables associated with intervention acceptance and with any significant change in meropenem consumption, hospital-acquired multidrug-resistant (MDR) bloodstream infections (BSIs) and 30-day all-cause crude death in MDR BSIs. Results. Adequacy of meropenem prescription and de-escalation from meropenem treatment to narrower-spectrum antibiotic improved progressively over time, after ASP implementation (p<0.001). Interventions on prescription were performed in 330 (38.7%) patients without meropenem justified treatment, in 269 intervention was accepted and in 61 not. Intervention acceptance was associated with shorter duration of treatment, cost and inpatient days (p<0.05); intervention rejection was not associated with severity of patient. During the period 2015-2017, meropenem consumption decreased compared with 2012-2014 [Rate ratio (RR) 0.67; 95%CI: 0.58- 0.77, p<0.001]). Likewise decreased, hospital-acquired MDR BSIs rate (RR 0.63; 95%CI: 0.38-1.02, p=0,048) and 30-day all-cause crude death in MDR BSIs (RR 0.45; 95%CI: 0.14-1.24, p=0.09), coinciding in time with ASP start-up. Conclusions. The decrease and better use of meropenem achieved had a sustained clinical, economic and ecological impact, reducing costs and mortality of hospital acquired MDR BSIs

Long-term carbapenems antimicrobial stewardship program

Abstract: Objective. To evaluate clinical and antibiotic resistance impact of carbapenems stewardship programs. Methods: descriptive study, pre-post-intervention, between January 2012 and December 2019; 350-bed teaching hospital. Prospective audit and feedback to prescribers was carried out between January 2015 and December 2019. We evaluate adequacy of carbapenems prescription to local guidelines and compare results between cases with accepted or rejected intervention. Analysis of antibiotic-consumption and hospital-acquired multidrug-resistant (MDR) bloodstream infections (BSIs) was performed. Results: 1432 patients were followed. Adequacy of carbapenems prescription improved from 49.7% in 2015 to 80.9% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Interventions on prescription were performed in 448 (31.3%) patients without carbapenem-justified treatment, in 371 intervention was accepted, in 77 it was not. Intervention acceptance was associated with shorter duration of all antibiotic treatment and inpatient days (p < 0.05), without differences in outcome. During the period 2015–2019, compared with 2012–2014, decreased meropenem consumption (Rate Ratio 0.58; 95%CI: 0.55–0.63), candidemia and hospital-acquired MDR BSIs rate (RR 0.62; 95%CI: 0.41–0.92, p = 0.02), and increased cefepime (RR 2; 95%CI: 1.77–2.26) and piperacillin-tazobactam consumption (RR 1.17; 95%CI: 1.11–1.24), p < 0.001. Conclusions: the decrease and better use of carbapenems achieved could have clinical and ecological impact over five years, reduce inpatient days, hospital-acquired MDR BSIs, and candidemia, despite the increase in other antibiotic-consumption

Treatment with tocilizumab or corticosteroids for COVID-19 patients with hyperinflammatory state: a multicentre cohort study (SAM-COVID-19)

Objectives: The objective of this study was to estimate the association between tocilizumab or corticosteroids and the risk of intubation or death in patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) with a hyperinflammatory state according to clinical and laboratory parameters. Methods: A cohort study was performed in 60 Spanish hospitals including 778 patients with COVID-19 and clinical and laboratory data indicative of a hyperinflammatory state. Treatment was mainly with tocilizumab, an intermediate-high dose of corticosteroids (IHDC), a pulse dose of corticosteroids (PDC), combination therapy, or no treatment. Primary outcome was intubation or death; follow-up was 21 days. Propensity score-adjusted estimations using Cox regression (logistic regression if needed) were calculated. Propensity scores were used as confounders, matching variables and for the inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs). Results: In all, 88, 117, 78 and 151 patients treated with tocilizumab, IHDC, PDC, and combination therapy, respectively, were compared with 344 untreated patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 10 (11.4%), 27 (23.1%), 12 (15.4%), 40 (25.6%) and 69 (21.1%), respectively. The IPTW-based hazard ratios (odds ratio for combination therapy) for the primary endpoint were 0.32 (95%CI 0.22-0.47; p < 0.001) for tocilizumab, 0.82 (0.71-1.30; p 0.82) for IHDC, 0.61 (0.43-0.86; p 0.006) for PDC, and 1.17 (0.86-1.58; p 0.30) for combination therapy. Other applications of the propensity score provided similar results, but were not significant for PDC. Tocilizumab was also associated with lower hazard of death alone in IPTW analysis (0.07; 0.02-0.17; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Tocilizumab might be useful in COVID-19 patients with a hyperinflammatory state and should be prioritized for randomized trials in this situatio