Literature DB >> 25671098

Disposition of linezolid or daptomycin in Enterococcal bloodstream infections according to vancomycin resistant Enterococcus colonization.

Elizabeth Short1, John Esterly2, Michael Postelnick1, Jeannie Ong3, Milena McLaughlin4.   

Abstract

Vancomycin resistant Enterococcus (VRE) colonized patients are likely to receive VRE targeted Gram-positive antibiotics and may not be de-escalated appropriately once final cultures are available. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in VRE-colonized and non-VRE colonized patients with Enterococcal bloodstream infections. Of 101 patients (n = 50 VRE-colonized; n = 51 non-colonized), empiric therapy with linezolid or daptomycin was started more often in VRE-colonized than non-colonized patients (n = 8, 15.5% vs n = 27, 54%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in de-escalation once VRE infection was ruled out (non-colonized, n = 2, 66.7% vs VRE-colonized, n = 2, 50%, p = 0.09). This study encourages continued stewardship vigilance to decrease inappropriate antibiotic use.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Daptomycin; De-escalation; Enterococcus; Linezolid; VRE; Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus

Year:  2014        PMID: 25671098      PMCID: PMC4322851          DOI: 10.1186/2047-2994-3-37

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control        ISSN: 2047-2994            Impact factor:   4.887


Background

Enterococcus is a common cause of nosocomial infections, and the incidence of vancomycin resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infection continues to rise [1, 2]. Patients with VRE infection incur an increased cost of care of $27, 190 compared to patients with vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus (VSE) infection [3]. Additionally, patients with an Enterococcal bloodstream infection (BSI) who are VRE-colonized frequently receive empiric Gram-positive antibiotics targeted against VRE, such as linezolid or daptomycin. Finalized cultures growing VSE may warrant appropriate antibiotic de-escalation, which is a critical stewardship issue. Unnecessary linezolid and daptomycin use has been associated with increasing emergence of linezolid and daptomycin resistant VRE strains and represents a significant public health problem [4, 5]. We sought to determine the percent of patients with an Enterococcal BSI initially started on linezolid or daptomycin whose therapy was de-escalated once finalized culture data is available.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, IL. Patients >18 years of age with at least one positive blood culture for Enterococcus spp., identified between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2011, that was treated as an active infection by the attending physician were evaluated for inclusion in the study. Patients were excluded if the attending physician elected not to treat the positive blood culture as an active infection or if the patient had a polymicrobial BSI. Only the first positive blood culture per patient during the study period was included. VRE colonization status was determined by active surveillance or previous documented VRE infection. Active surveillance is employed via rectal swab upon admission and then weekly in high-risk units including intensive care (medical and surgical), hematology and oncology, and transplant (solid organ and bone marrow) per the infection control and prevention departmental protocol. The Northwestern University and Midwestern University Institutional Review Boards approved this study. Patients were stratified into two groups, VRE-colonized and non-VRE colonized. The primary outcome studied was the percent of patients with an Enterococcal BSI initially started on linezolid or daptomycin whose therapy was de-escalated once VRE infection was ruled out. The secondary endpoints included the percent of BSI caused by VRE, percent of patients with neutropenia, and incidence of sepsis and death. Continuous variables were evaluated with the Student’s t-test, and categorical variables were evaluated with the Chi-square or Fisher’s Exact test as appropriate. All tests were two tailed with p < 0.05 considered significant. Data analysis was performed using Intercooled Stata, version 12 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX).

Findings

A total of 162 patients were identified and considered for inclusion from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2011. Of the 162 patients, 61 patients did not meet inclusion due to: polymicrobial BSI (73%), the attending physician did not treat the positive blood culture as an active infection (18%), age under 18 years (5%), and culture determined to be contamination (4%). Therefore, 101 patients were included in the analysis (n = 50 VRE-colonized; n = 51 non-colonized). VRE-colonized patients were younger than non-colonized patients (57.8 years vs. 66.1 years, p < 0.01). There were no differences in gender, race, infection source, or the place from which the patient was admitted to the hospital (p > 0.05 for all). Empiric therapy with linezolid or daptomycin was started more often in VRE-colonized than non-colonized patients (54%, n = 27 vs. 15.5%, n = 8; p < 0.01; Table 1). There were eleven non-colonized patients with VRE BSI, eight of which were initiated on VRE therapy before susceptibilities and 42 VRE-colonized patients with VRE BSI, 27 of which were initiated on VRE therapy before susceptibilities. There were eight non-colonized patients who empirically received linezolid or daptomycin, and two of the three patients that could be de-escalated were de-escalated. There were 27 colonized patients that empirically received linezolid or daptomycin and two of the four that could be de-escalated were de-escalated. For the primary outcome, there was no difference between the groups in de-escalation once VRE was ruled out (50%, n = 2 in the colonized group vs. 66.7%, n = 2 in the non-colonized group; p = 0.99). VRE-colonized patients were more likely to have VRE BSI (p < 0.01), neutropenia (p < 0.01), or a transplant (p < 0.01). There was no difference between the groups regarding sepsis (p = 0.09) and mortality (p = 0.78).
Table 1

Primary and secondary outcomes of patients with enterococcal BSI

Non-colonizedVRE-colonizedp-value
n = 51n = 50
Primary outcomes
Empiric linezolid or daptomycin (n, %)8 (15.6)27 (54)<0.01
Could be de-escalated (n, %)3 (37.5)4 (14.8)0.31
De-escalated (n, %)2 (66.7)2 (50)0.09
Secondary outcomes
VRE BSI (n, %)11 (21.5)42 (84)<0.01
E. faecium (n, %)17 (33.3)42 (84)<0.01
Neutropenia (n, %)3 (5.9)16 (32)<0.01
Transplant (n, %)7 (13.7)19 (38)<0.01
Sepsis (n, %)19 (37.2)27 (54)0.09
Mortality (n, %)10 (19.6)11 (22)0.78
Primary and secondary outcomes of patients with enterococcal BSI

Discussion

Our study found that the incidence of VRE BSI was significantly greater in the VRE-colonized group compared to the non-colonized group. While approximately half of the VRE-colonized patients were empirically started on linezolid or daptomycin, only 50% of those eligible were appropriately de-escalated. This poses a potential risk for antibiotic resistance and supports the need for continued stewardship vigilance. Inappropriate use of antibiotics with VRE activity may perpetuate resistance; therefore appropriate de-escalation is critical [6]. Our study supports reports that patients with an Enterococcal BSI with neutropenia or a transplant who are VRE-colonized are at a higher risk of VRE infection than non-colonized patients [7, 8]. Yeh et al found that patients with severe illness, prolonged hospitalization, surgical exploration, and frequent use of antibiotics are at high risk for VRE infections [9]. Empiric linezolid or daptomycin for Enterococcal BSI in these patients may be therefore warranted until VRE is ruled out; however, sepsis was not a risk factor for VRE infection. Limitations for this study should be acknowledged. This was a retrospective cohort study and is subject to the bias associated with this study design. The study was limited to a single institution with small number of patients eligible for de-escalation; however, these stewardship issues are likely to be generalizable to other institutions. VRE-colonized patients were more likely to be empirically stared on linezolid or daptomycin to cover VRE. This study encourages continued stewardship vigilance to decrease inappropriate antibiotic use. Further study is warranted to address this important antimicrobial stewardship issue.
  9 in total

1.  National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004, issued October 2004.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.918

Review 2.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: an evolving pathogen.

Authors:  Martin E Stryjewski; G Ralph Corey
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Increasing incidence of linezolid-intermediate or -resistant, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium strains parallels increasing linezolid consumption.

Authors:  Marc H Scheetz; Stephanie A Knechtel; Michael Malczynski; Michael J Postelnick; Chao Qi
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-04-07       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Differences in outcomes for patients with bacteremia due to vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium or vancomycin-susceptible E. faecium.

Authors:  P K Linden; A W Pasculle; R Manez; D J Kramer; J J Fung; A D Pinna; S Kusne
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Impact of vancomycin resistance on mortality among patients with neutropenia and enterococcal bloodstream infection.

Authors:  Carlos A DiazGranados; John A Jernigan
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2005-01-17       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  Emergence of daptomycin-resistant VRE: experience of a single institution.

Authors:  Mini Kamboj; Nina Cohen; Kathleen Gilhuley; N Esther Babady; Susan K Seo; Kent A Sepkowitz
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.254

7.  Enterococcus faecium bacteremia: does vancomycin resistance make a difference?

Authors:  V Stosor; L R Peterson; M Postelnick; G A Noskin
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1998-03-09

8.  Vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) carriage and infection in intensive care units.

Authors:  Kuo-Ming Yeh; L K Siu; Jen-Chang Chang; Feng-Yee Chang
Journal:  Microb Drug Resist       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.431

9.  Risk of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) bloodstream infection among patients colonized with VRE.

Authors:  Chamion N Olivier; Ruth K Blake; Lisa L Steed; Cassandra D Salgado
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.254

  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  Infection prevention requirements for the medical care of immunosuppressed patients: recommendations of the Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention (KRINKO) at the Robert Koch Institute.

Authors: 
Journal:  GMS Hyg Infect Control       Date:  2022-04-13

2.  Infection Prevention in Transplantation.

Authors:  Steven A Pergam
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.725

3. 

Authors: 
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.513

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.