| Literature DB >> 30636947 |
Jae-Hoon Ko1, Si-Ho Kim1, Cheol-In Kang1, Sun Young Cho1, Nam Yong Lee2, Doo Ryeon Chung1, Kyong Ran Peck1, Jae-Hoon Song1.
Abstract
We implemented a carbapenem-saving strategy in hemato-oncology patients from 2013, using an empirical combination of piperacillin-tazobactam and amikacin for high-risk hemato-oncology patients with febrile neutropenia, who remain hemodynamically unstable > 72 hours despite initial cefepime treatment. All-cause mortality was not different between the two periods (6.54 and 6.57 deaths per 1,000 person-day, P = 0.926). Group 2 carbapenem use significantly decreased after strategy implementation (78.43 vs. 67.43 monthly days of therapy, P = 0.018), while carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli did not show meaningful changes during the study period. Our carbapenem-saving strategy could effectively suppress carbapenem use without an increase of overall mortality.Entities:
Keywords: Amikacin; Carbapenem-Saving; Gram-Negative Bacilli; Piperacillin-Tazobactam; Resistance
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30636947 PMCID: PMC6327090 DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e17
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Korean Med Sci ISSN: 1011-8934 Impact factor: 2.153
Comparison of before and after strategy implementation
| Variables | Before strategy (Apr 2011–Dec 2012) | After strategy (Jan 2013–Mar 2015) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inpatient, PD | 5,855.55 ± 130.30 | 5,804.67 ± 200.33 | 0.294 | ||
| All-cause mortality, death per 1,000 PD | 6.54 ± 1.19 | 6.57 ± 1.06 | 0.926 | ||
| Antibiotic use, DOTs per 1,000 PD | |||||
| AMK | 1.42 ± 1.609 | 11.84 ± 5.951 | < 0.001 | ||
| PTZ | 95.44 ± 13.84 | 127.67 ± 19.05 | < 0.001 | ||
| Gr1C | 5.04 ± 2.86 | 4.58 ± 2.89 | 0.589 | ||
| Gr2C | 78.43 ± 11.76 | 67.43 ± 19.11 | 0.018 | ||
| Bacteremia and resistance, per 1,000 PD | |||||
| Enterobacteriaceae | 5.99 ± 1.62 | 7.14 ± 2.58 | 0.067 | ||
| AMK resistance rate | 0.27 ± 0.51 | 0.27 ± 0.66 | 0.992 | ||
| PTZ resistance rate | 0.29 ± 0.52 | 1.42 ± 1.50 | 0.001 | ||
| Gr2C resistance rate | 0.06 ± 0.19 | 0.09 ± 0.41 | 0.732 | ||
| 1.08 ± 0.97 | 0.88 ± 0.83 | 0.450 | |||
| AMK resistance rate | 1.42 ± 3.12 | 1.18 ± 3.73 | 0.806 | ||
| PTZ resistance rate | 5.08 ± 6.02 | 2.53 ± 5.44 | 0.137 | ||
| Gr2C resistance rate | 7.83 ± 6.83 | 5.97 ± 7.43 | 0.372 | ||
| 0.21 ± 0.39 | 0.80 ± 1.37 | 0.043 | |||
| AMK resistance rate | 1.93 ± 5.06 | 2.80 ± 5.72 | 0.582 | ||
| Gr2C resistance rate | 1.93 ± 50.6 | 8.30 ± 8.33 | 0.002 | ||
Data are mean ± standard deviation.
PD = person-day, DOTs = days of therapy, AMK = amikacin, PTZ = piperacillin-tazobactam, Gr1C = group 1 carbapenem, Gr2C = group 2 carbapenem.
Fig. 1Overall trend for antibiotic use and resistance.
Overall trend for antibiotic use and resistance in (A) Enterobacteriaceae, (B) Pseudomonas spp., and (C) Acinetobacter spp. Antibiotic use and resistance during the study period was evaluated by linear regression model and P values are in each figure. Antibiotic use is DOTs/1,000 PD, and resistance rate is percent per 1,000 PD.
AMK = amikacin, PTZ = piperacillin-tazobactam, Gr2C = group 2 carbapenem, DOTs = days of treatment, PD = person-day.
Fig. 2Association between antibiotic prescriptions and resistance.
Association between antibiotic prescription and resistance for (A) Enterobacteriaceae, (B) Pseudomonas spp., and (C) Acinetobacter spp. evaluated by linear regression model with significant P values in figures. Resistant rate is percent per 1,000 PD.
AMK = amikacin, PTZ = piperacillin-tazobactam, Gr2C = group 2 carbapenem, PD = person-day.