Argentine Intersociety Consensus on Urinary Infection 2018-2019

La Sociedad Argentina de Infectología y otras sociedades científicas han actualizado estas recomendaciones utilizando, además de información internacional, la de un estudio multicéntrico prospectivo sobre infecciones del tracto urinario del adulto realizado en Argentina durante 2016-2017. La bacteriuria asintomática debe ser tratada solo en embarazadas, a quienes también se las debe investigar sistemáticamente; los antibióticos de elección son nitrofurantoína, amoxicilina, amoxicilina-clavulánico, cefalexina y trimetoprimasulfametoxazol. Ante procedimientos que impliquen lesión con sangrado del tracto urinario se recomienda solicitar urocultivo para pesquisar bacteriuria asintomática, y, si resultara positivo, administrar antimicrobianos según sensibilidad desde inmediatamente antes hasta 24 horas luego de la intervención. En mujeres, la cistitis puede ser tratada con nitrofurantoina, cefalexina, o fosfomicina y no se recomienda usar trimetoprima-sulfametoxazol o fluoroquinolonas; en pielonefritis puede emplearse ciprofloxacina, cefixima o cefalexina si el tratamiento es ambulatorio o ceftriaxona, cefazolina o amikacina si es hospitalario. En los hombres, las infecciones del tracto urinario se consideran siempre complicadas. Se recomienda tratamiento con nitrofurantoina o cefalexina por 7 días, o bien monodosis con fosfomicina. Para la pielonefritis en hombres se sugiere ciprofloxacina, ceftriaxona o cefixima si el tratamiento es ambulatorio y ceftriaxona o amikacina si es hospitalario. Se sugiere tratar las prostatitis bacterianas agudas con ceftriaxona o gentamicina. En cuanto a las prostatitis bacterianas crónicas, si bien su tratamiento de elección hasta hace poco fueron las fluoroquinolonas, la creciente resistencia y ciertasdudas sobre la seguridad de estas drogas obligan a considerar el uso de alternativas como fosfomicina.The Argentine Society of Infectious Diseases and other scientific societies have updated these recommendations based on data on urinary tract infections in adults obtained from a prospective multicenter study conducted in Argentina during 2016-2017. Asymptomatic bacteriuria should be treated only in pregnant women, who should also be systematically investigated; the antibiotics of choice are nitrofurantoin, amoxicillin, clavulanic/amoxicillin, cephalexin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. In procedures involving injury to the urinary tract with bleeding, it is recommended to request urine culture and, in the presence of bacteriuria, antimicrobial treatment according to sensitivity should be prescribed from immediately before up to 24 hours after the intervention. In women, cystitis can be treated with nitrofurantoin, cephalexin or fosfomycin, while trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and fluoroquinolones are not recommended; pyelonephritis can be treated with ciprofloxacin, cefixime or cephalexin in ambulatory women or ceftriaxone, cefazolin or amikacin in those who are hospitalized. In men, urinary tract infections are always considered complicated; nitrofurantoin or cephalexin are recommended for 7 days, alternatively fosfomycin should be given in a single dose. In men, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone or cefixime are suggested for pyelonephritis on ambulatory treatment whereas ceftriaxone or amikacin are recommended for hospitalized patients. Acute bacterial prostatitis can be treated with ceftriaxone or gentamicin. Fluoroquinolones were the choice treatment for chronic bacterial prostatitis until recently; they are no longer recommended due to the increasing resistance and recent concerns regarding the safety of these drugs; alternative antibiotics such as fosfomycin are to be considered.Fil: Nemirovsky, Corina. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Lopez Furst, María José. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Pryluka, Daniel. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: de Vedia, Lautaro. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Scapellato, Pablo. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Colque, Angel. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Barcelona, Laura. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Desse, Javier. Sociedad Argentina de Infectologia; ArgentinaFil: Caradont, Matías. Sociedad Argentina de Urología; ArgentinaFil: Varcasia, Daniel. Sociedad Argentina de Urología; ArgentinaFil: Ipohorski,Gabriel. Federación Argentina de Urología; ArgentinaFil: Votta, Roberto. Federación Argentina de Sociedades de Ginecología y Obstetricia; ArgentinaFil: Zylberman, Marcelo. Sociedad Argentina de Medicina; ArgentinaFil: Romani, Adriana de Fátima. Sociedad Argentina de Medicina; ArgentinaFil: Valdez, Pascual. Sociedad Argentina de Medicina; ArgentinaFil: Penini, Magdalena. Sociedad Argentina de Bacteriología, Micología y Parasitología Clínica; ArgentinaFil: De Paulis, Adriana. Sociedad Argentina de Bacteriología, Micología y Parasitología Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Lucero, Celeste. Dirección Nacional de Instituto de Investigación.Administración Nacional de Laboratorios e Institutos de Salud "Dr. Carlos G. Malbrán"; ArgentinaFil: Sandor, Andres. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Contreras, Rosita. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Nannini, Esteban. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Rosario. Instituto de Inmunología Clinica y Experimental de Rosario. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Médicas. Instituto de Inmunología Clinica y Experimental de Rosario; ArgentinaFil: Gañete, Marcelo. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Ralli, Hector. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Lopardo, Gustavo. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Mykietiuk, Analia. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Aronson, Sandra. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Fernández Laus, Adriana. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Fernández Garces, Alejandro. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Rodríguez, Claudia. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Chattas, Ana. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Farina, Javier. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Clara, Liliana. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Nuccetelli, Yanina. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; ArgentinaFil: Amalfa, Flavia. Sociedad Argentina de Infectología; Argentin

Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of Latin American healthcare workers relating to antibiotic stewardship and antibiotic use: a cross-sectional multi-country study

Abstract Background The burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Latin America is high. Little is known about healthcare workers’ (HCWs) knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship (AS), AMR, and antibiotic use (AU) in the region. Methods HCWs from 42 hospitals from 5 Latin American countries were invited to take an electronic, voluntary, anonymous survey regarding knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of AS, AMR, and AU between March–April 2023. Findings Overall, 996 HCWs completed the survey (52% physicians, 32% nurses, 11% pharmacists, 3% microbiologists, and 2% “other”). More than 90% of respondents indicated optimizing AU was a priority at their healthcare facility (HCF), 69% stated the importance of AS was communicated at their HCF, and 23% were unfamiliar with the term “antibiotic stewardship”. Most (> 95%) respondents acknowledged that appropriate AU can reduce AMR; however, few thought AU (< 30%) or AMR (< 50%) were a problem in their HCF. Lack of access to antibiogram and to locally endorsed guidelines was reported by 51% and 34% of HCWs, respectively. Among prescribers, 53% did not consider non-physicians’ opinions to make antibiotic-related decisions, 22% reported not receiving education on how to select antibiotics based on culture results and 60% stated patients and families influence their antibiotic decisions. Conclusions Although HCWs perceived improving AU as a priority, they did not perceive AU or AMR as a problem in their HCF. AS opportunities include improved access to guidelines, access to AMR/AU data, teamwork, and education on AS for HCWs and patients and families

Presentation, management, and outcomes of older compared to younger adults with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit: a multicenter cohort study

Purpose: Older adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) usually have fair baseline functional capacity, yet their age and frailty may compromise their management. We compared the characteristics and management of older (≥ 75&nbsp;years) versus younger adults hospitalized in ICU with hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (HA-BSI). Methods: Nested cohort study within the EUROBACT-2 database, a multinational prospective cohort study including adults (≥ 18&nbsp;years) hospitalized in the ICU during 2019-2021. We compared older versus younger adults in terms of infection characteristics (clinical signs and symptoms, source, and microbiological data), management (imaging, source control, antimicrobial therapy), and outcomes (28-day mortality and hospital discharge). Results: Among 2111 individuals hospitalized in 219 ICUs with HA-BSI, 563 (27%) were ≥ 75&nbsp;years old. Compared to younger patients, these individuals had higher comorbidity score and lower functional capacity; presented more often with a pulmonary, urinary, or unknown HA-BSI source; and had lower heart rate, blood pressure and temperature at presentation. Pathogens and resistance rates were similar in both groups. Differences in management included mainly lower rates of effective source control achievement among aged individuals. Older adults also had significantly higher day-28 mortality (50% versus 34%, p &lt; 0.001), and lower rates of discharge from hospital (12% versus 20%, p &lt; 0.001) by this time. Conclusions: Older adults with HA-BSI hospitalized in ICU have different baseline characteristics and source of infection compared to younger patients. Management of older adults differs mainly by lower probability to achieve source control. This should be targeted to improve outcomes among older ICU patients

The role of centre and country factors on process and outcome indicators in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections

Purpose: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the associations between centre/country-based factors and two important process and outcome indicators in patients with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HABSI). Methods: We used data on HABSI from the prospective EUROBACT-2 study to evaluate the associations between centre/country factors on a process or an outcome indicator: adequacy of antimicrobial therapy within the first 24&nbsp;h or 28-day mortality, respectively. Mixed logistical models with clustering by centre identified factors associated with both indicators. Results: Two thousand two hundred nine patients from two hundred one intensive care units (ICUs) were included in forty-seven countries. Overall, 51% (n = 1128) of patients received an adequate antimicrobial therapy and the 28-day mortality was 38% (n = 839). The availability of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for aminoglycosides everyday [odds ratio (OR) 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-2.14] or within a few hours (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.34-2.38), surveillance cultures for multidrug-resistant organism carriage performed weekly (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.09-1.93), and increasing Human Development Index (HDI) values were associated with adequate antimicrobial therapy. The presence of intermediate care beds (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84), TDM for aminoglycoside available everyday (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-1.00) or within a few hours (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37-0.70), 24/7 consultation of clinical pharmacists (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.95), percentage of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) between 10% and 25% in the ICU (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.00-2.80), and decreasing HDI values were associated with 28-day mortality. Conclusion: Centre/country factors should be targeted for future interventions to improve management strategies and outcome of HABSI in ICU patients

Epidemiology and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in intensive care unit patients: the EUROBACT-2 international cohort study

Purpose In the critically ill, hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HA-BSI) are associated with significant mortality. Granular data are required for optimizing management, and developing guidelines and clinical trials. Methods We carried out a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥ 18 years of age) with HA-BSI treated in intensive care units (ICUs) between June 2019 and February 2021. Results 2600 patients from 333 ICUs in 52 countries were included. 78% HA-BSI were ICU-acquired. Median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 8 [IQR 5; 11] at HA-BSI diagnosis. Most frequent sources of infection included pneumonia (26.7%) and intravascular catheters (26.4%). Most frequent pathogens were Gram-negative bacteria (59.0%), predominantly Klebsiella spp. (27.9%), Acinetobacter spp. (20.3%), Escherichia coli (15.8%), and Pseudomonas spp. (14.3%). Carbapenem resistance was present in 37.8%, 84.6%, 7.4%, and 33.2%, respectively. Difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) was present in 23.5% and pan-drug resistance in 1.5%. Antimicrobial therapy was deemed adequate within 24 h for 51.5%. Antimicrobial resistance was associated with longer delays to adequate antimicrobial therapy. Source control was needed in 52.5% but not achieved in 18.2%. Mortality was 37.1%, and only 16.1% had been discharged alive from hospital by day-28. Conclusions HA-BSI was frequently caused by Gram-negative, carbapenem-resistant and DTR pathogens. Antimicrobial resistance led to delays in adequate antimicrobial therapy. Mortality was high, and at day-28 only a minority of the patients were discharged alive from the hospital. Prevention of antimicrobial resistance and focusing on adequate antimicrobial therapy and source control are important to optimize patient management and outcomes