Abstract
Abstract
Objective:
To re-examine the use of noncarbapenems (NCBPs), specifically piperacillin-tazobactam (PTZ) and cefepime (FEP), for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase–producing Enterobacterales bloodstream infections (ESBL-E BSIs).
Design:
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting:
Tertiary-care, academic medical center.
Patients:
The study included patients hospitalized between May 2016 and May 2019 with a positive blood culture for ESBL-E. Patients were excluded if they received treatment with antibiotics other than meropenem, ertapenem, PTZ, or FEP. Patients were also excluded if they were aged <18 years, received antibiotics for <24 hours, were treated for polymicrobial BSI, or received concomitant antibiotic therapy for a separate gram-negative infection.
Methods:
We compared CBPs with FEP or PTZ for the treatment of ESBL-E BSI. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical cure, microbiologic cure, infection recurrence, and resistance development.
Results:
Data from 114 patients were collected and analyzed; 74 (65%) patients received carbapenem (CBP) therapy and 40 (35%) patients received a NCBP (30 received FEP and 10 received PTZ). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6% (N = 7), with a higher death rate in the CBP arm than in the N-CBP arm, (8% vs 3%; P = .42). No difference in mortality was detected between subgroups with Pitt bacteremia score ≥4, those requiring ICU admission, those whose infections were cause by a nongenitourinary source or causative organism (ie, 76 had Escherichia coli and 38 had Klebsiella spp). We detected no differences in secondary outcomes between the groups.
Conclusion:
Compared to CBPs, FEP and PTZ did not result in greater mortality or decreased clinical efficacy for the treatment of ESBL-E BSI caused by susceptible organisms.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献