OBJECTIVE: To compare a mixing vs. a cycling strategy of use of anti-Pseudomonas antibiotics on the acquisition of resistant Gram-negative bacilli in the critical care setting. DESIGN: Prospective, open, comparative study of two strategies of antibiotic use. SETTING: Two medical intensive care units of a university hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 346 patients admitted for >or=48 hrs to two separate medical intensive care units during an 8-month period. INTERVENTIONS: Patients, who according to the attending physician's judgment required an anti-Pseudomonas regimen, were assigned to receive cefepime/ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin, a carbapemen, or piperacillin-tazobactam in this order. "Cycling" was accomplished by prescribing one of these antibiotics during 1 month each. "Mixing" was accomplished by using the same order of antibiotic administration on consecutive patients. Interventions were carried out during two successive 4-month periods, starting with mixing in one unit and cycling in the other. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Swabbing of nares, pharynx, and rectum and culture of respiratory secretions were obtained thrice weekly. The main outcome variable was the proportion of patients acquiring enteric or nonfermentative Gram-negative bacilli resistant to the antibiotics under intervention. The scheduled cycling of antibiotics was only partially successful. Although the expected antibiotic was the most prevalent anti-Pseudomonas agent used within the corresponding period, it never accounted for >45% of all anti-Pseudomonas antimicrobials administered. During mixing, a significantly higher proportion of patients acquired a strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistant to cefepime (9% vs. 3%, p = .01), and there was a trend toward a more frequent acquisition of resistance to ceftazidime (p = .06), imipenem (p = .06), and meropenem (p = .07). No differences in the rate of acquisition of potentially resistant Gram-negative bacilli or incidence of intensive care unit-acquired infections and infections due to particular organisms were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill medical patients, a strategy of monthly rotation of anti-Pseudomonas beta-lactams and ciprofloxacin may perform better than a strategy of mixing in the acquisition of P. aeruginosa resistant to selected beta-lactams.
OBJECTIVE: To compare a mixing vs. a cycling strategy of use of anti-Pseudomonas antibiotics on the acquisition of resistant Gram-negative bacilli in the critical care setting. DESIGN: Prospective, open, comparative study of two strategies of antibiotic use. SETTING: Two medical intensive care units of a university hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 346 patients admitted for >or=48 hrs to two separate medical intensive care units during an 8-month period. INTERVENTIONS:Patients, who according to the attending physician's judgment required an anti-Pseudomonas regimen, were assigned to receive cefepime/ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin, a carbapemen, or piperacillin-tazobactam in this order. "Cycling" was accomplished by prescribing one of these antibiotics during 1 month each. "Mixing" was accomplished by using the same order of antibiotic administration on consecutive patients. Interventions were carried out during two successive 4-month periods, starting with mixing in one unit and cycling in the other. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Swabbing of nares, pharynx, and rectum and culture of respiratory secretions were obtained thrice weekly. The main outcome variable was the proportion of patients acquiring enteric or nonfermentative Gram-negative bacilli resistant to the antibiotics under intervention. The scheduled cycling of antibiotics was only partially successful. Although the expected antibiotic was the most prevalent anti-Pseudomonas agent used within the corresponding period, it never accounted for >45% of all anti-Pseudomonas antimicrobials administered. During mixing, a significantly higher proportion of patients acquired a strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistant to cefepime (9% vs. 3%, p = .01), and there was a trend toward a more frequent acquisition of resistance to ceftazidime (p = .06), imipenem (p = .06), and meropenem (p = .07). No differences in the rate of acquisition of potentially resistant Gram-negative bacilli or incidence of intensive care unit-acquired infections and infections due to particular organisms were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill medical patients, a strategy of monthly rotation of anti-Pseudomonasbeta-lactams and ciprofloxacin may perform better than a strategy of mixing in the acquisition of P. aeruginosa resistant to selected beta-lactams.
Authors: Juan P Horcajada; Santiago Grau; José Ramón Paño-Pardo; Antonio López; Antonio Oliver; José M Cisneros; Jesús Rodriguez-Baño Journal: Germs Date: 2018-09-03
Authors: Shiva Sarraf-Yazdi; Michelle Sharpe; Kyla M Bennett; Tim L Dotson; Deverick J Anderson; Steven N Vaslef Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2012-03-10 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: K de With; F Allerberger; S Amann; P Apfalter; H-R Brodt; T Eckmanns; M Fellhauer; H K Geiss; O Janata; R Krause; S Lemmen; E Meyer; H Mittermayer; U Porsche; E Presterl; S Reuter; B Sinha; R Strauß; A Wechsler-Fördös; C Wenisch; W V Kern Journal: Infection Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.553
Authors: Jeffrey A Claridge; Priscilla Pang; William H Leukhardt; Joseph F Golob; Jeffrey W Carter; Adam M Fadlalla Journal: Surg Infect (Larchmt) Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 2.150
Authors: N Cobos-Trigueros; M Rinaudo; M Solé; P Castro; J Pumarol; C Hernández; S Fernández; J M Nicolás; J Mallolas; J Vila; L Morata; J M Gatell; A Soriano; J Mensa; J A Martínez Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Saskia Nijssen; Ad Fluit; David van de Vijver; Janetta Top; Rob Willems; Marc J M Bonten Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 17.440