Charles-Edouard Luyt1, Morgane Faure2, Isabelle Bonnet3, Sébastien Besset4, Florent Huang4, Helga Junot5, Guillaume Hékimian4, Matthieu Schmidt6, Nicolas Bréchot6, Alain Combes6, Alexandra Aubry3, Julien Mayaux2, Jean Chastre4. 1. Service de Réanimation, Institut de Cardiologie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Université Paris 06, INSERM, UMRS_1166-ICAN Institute of Cardiometabolism and Nutrition, Paris, France. Electronic address: charles-edouard.luyt@aphp.fr. 2. Service de Pneumologie et Réanimation Médicale, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. 3. Service de Bactériologie-Hygiène, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; Sorbonne Université, INSERM, U1135, Centre d'Immunologie et des Maladies Infectieuses, Cimi-Paris, équipe 13, F-75013, Paris, France. 4. Service de Réanimation, Institut de Cardiologie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. 5. Service de Pharmacie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. 6. Service de Réanimation, Institut de Cardiologie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Université Paris 06, INSERM, UMRS_1166-ICAN Institute of Cardiometabolism and Nutrition, Paris, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of non-carbapenem antibiotics to treat severe extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) infections in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: This retrospective observational study conducted in two ICUs compared the outcomes of patients with ESBL-E infections administered a carbapenem or a non-carbapenem antibiotic as their definitive treatment. The primary outcome was treatment failure within 30 days, a composite endpoint of ESBL-E infection recurrence and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates, ESBL-E infection recurrence and infection(s) due to other pathogen(s). RESULTS: Among 107 patients included in the study, 67 received a carbapenem and 40 received a non-carbapenem antibiotic as their definitive treatment. Clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. Comparing patients given a non-carbapenem antibiotic with those administered a carbapenem, they had similar 30-day treatment failure (43% vs. 61%, respectively; P = 0.06) and ESBL-E infection recurrence rates (25% vs. 22%; P = 0.8), but the former had lower 30-day mortality (23% vs. 45%; P = 0.02) and in-hospital mortality rates (23% vs. 49%; P = 0.005). Secondary infection rates caused by other pathogen(s), including Clostridium difficile, were comparable. Outcomes were comparable regardless of whether or not patients received an empirical carbapenem. CONCLUSION: For ICU patients with severe ESBL-E infections, treatment with a non-carbapenem antibiotic was not associated with poorer outcomes compared with a carbapenem antibiotic.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of non-carbapenem antibiotics to treat severe extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) infections in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: This retrospective observational study conducted in two ICUs compared the outcomes of patients with ESBL-E infections administered a carbapenem or a non-carbapenem antibiotic as their definitive treatment. The primary outcome was treatment failure within 30 days, a composite endpoint of ESBL-E infection recurrence and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates, ESBL-E infection recurrence and infection(s) due to other pathogen(s). RESULTS: Among 107 patients included in the study, 67 received a carbapenem and 40 received a non-carbapenem antibiotic as their definitive treatment. Clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. Comparing patients given a non-carbapenem antibiotic with those administered a carbapenem, they had similar 30-day treatment failure (43% vs. 61%, respectively; P = 0.06) and ESBL-E infection recurrence rates (25% vs. 22%; P = 0.8), but the former had lower 30-day mortality (23% vs. 45%; P = 0.02) and in-hospital mortality rates (23% vs. 49%; P = 0.005). Secondary infection rates caused by other pathogen(s), including Clostridium difficile, were comparable. Outcomes were comparable regardless of whether or not patients received an empirical carbapenem. CONCLUSION: For ICU patients with severe ESBL-E infections, treatment with a non-carbapenem antibiotic was not associated with poorer outcomes compared with a carbapenem antibiotic.