Search

Background: Our aim was to analyze mortality attributable to carbapenem-resistant (CR) gram-negative bacilli (GNB) in patients with bloodstream infections (BSIs)., Methods: Prospective multicentric study including patients with GNB-BSI from 19 Italian hospitals (June 2018-January 2020). Patients were followed-up to 30 days. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and attributable mortality. Attributable mortality was calculated in the following groups: Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Enterobacterales, metallo-β-lactamases (MBL)-producing Enterobacterales, CR-Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA), CR-Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB). A multivariable analysis with hospital fixed-effect was built to identify factors associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted OR (aORs) were reported. Attributable mortality was calculated according to the DRIVE-AB Consortium., Results: Overall, 1276 patients with monomicrobial GNB BSI were included: 723/1276 (56.7%) carbapenem-susceptible (CS)-GNB, 304/1276 (23.8%) KPC-, 77/1276 (6%) MBL-producing CRE, 61/1276 (4.8%) CRPA, and 111/1276 (8.7%) CRAB BSI. Thirty-day mortality in patients with CS-GNB BSI was 13.7% compared to 26.6%, 36.4%, 32.8% and 43.2% in patients with BSI by KPC-CRE, MBL-CRE, CRPA and CRAB, respectively (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, age, ward of hospitalization, SOFA score, and Charlson Index were factors associated with 30-day mortality, while urinary source of infection and early appropriate therapy resulted protective factors. Compared to CS-GNB, MBL-producing CRE (aOR 5.86, 95% CI 2.72-12.76), CRPA (aOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.48-5.95) and CRAB (aOR 2.65, 95% CI 1.52-4.61) were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. Attributable mortality rates were 5% for KPC-, 35% for MBL, 19% for CRPA, and 16% for CRAB., Conclusions: In patients with BSIs, carbapenem-resistance is associated with an excess of mortality, with MBL-producing CRE carrying the highest risk of death., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest. M. F. received unconditional grants from MSD and Gilead and grants or speaker honoraria from MSD, Angelini, Shionogi, Pfizer, Menarini, and Nordic Pharma. F. M. has participated on advisory boards and/or received speaker honoraria from Angelini, Correvio, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, Astellas, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, ViiV, bioMérieux, Biotest, Becton Dickinson, Pfizer, and Shionogi. G. T. received honoraria for educational meetings from Shionogi. All remaining authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Molecular analysis (MA) on heart valve (HV) improves the microbiologic diagnosis of infectious endocarditis (IE). The main drawback of MA is the lack of antimicrobial susceptibility information., Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort observational study of consecutive adult patients from April 2012 to May 2021 who underwent valve surgery at our hospital. The performance of MA, blood cultures (BC) and valve cultures (VC), and the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of MA were evaluated. Molecular antibiogram results were compared to culture-based antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST)., Results: A total of 137 patients with definite IE and 52 patients with no IE were enrolled in the study. Among IE cases BC, VC, and MA were positive in 75 (55%), 30 (22%), and 120 (88%) of IE cases, respectively. Among 62 cases of BC-negative IE (BCNE), 57 achieved diagnosis with MA. MA led to a change of antimicrobial therapy in 92% of BCNE. MA was negative in 100% of patients with no IE. Molecular antibiogram performed on 17 valve specimens that resulted positive for pathogens potential carrier of genes encoding for multidrug resistant mechanisms showed 100% concordance with AST., Conclusions: MA showed a high specificity and sensitivity in etiological diagnosis of IE. Molecular antibiogram could overcome the major limitation of MA that is the lack of susceptibility testing. We advocate for the inclusion of MA among diagnostic criteria for IE and for a more extensive use of molecular antibiogram when the culture result is negative, and MA is the only positive test., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Background: Risk factors for nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infections after solid organ transplant (SOT) are not well characterized. Here we aimed to describe these factors., Methods: Retrospective, multinational, 1:2 matched case-control study that included SOT recipients ≥12 years old diagnosed with NTM infection from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2018. Controls were matched on transplanted organ, NTM treatment center, and post-transplant survival greater than or equal to the time to NTM diagnosis. Logistic regression on matched pairs was used to assess associations between risk factors and NTM infections., Results: Analyses included 85 cases and 169 controls (59% male, 88% White, median age at time of SOT of 54 years [interquartile range {IQR} 40-62]). NTM infection occurred in kidney (42%), lung (35%), heart and liver (11% each), and pancreas transplant recipients (1%). Median time from transplant to infection was 21.6 months (IQR 5.3-55.2). Most underlying comorbidities were evenly distributed between groups; however, cases were older at the time of NTM diagnosis, more frequently on systemic corticosteroids and had a lower lymphocyte count (all P < .05). In the multivariable model, older age at transplant (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.04; 95 confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.07), hospital admission within 90 days (aOR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.41-6.98), receipt of antifungals (aOR, 5.35; 95% CI, 1.7-16.91), and lymphocyte-specific antibodies (aOR, 7.73; 95% CI, 1.07-56.14), were associated with NTM infection., Conclusions: Risk of NTM infection in SOT recipients was associated with older age at SOT, prior hospital admission, receipt of antifungals or lymphocyte-specific antibodies. NTM infection should be considered in SOT patients with these risk factors., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. C. M. C. reports the following grants or contracts unrelated to this work: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) subaward from Johns Hopkins University to the Washington University in St. Louis (funding by the CDC grant number 1U54CK000617-01-00), vendor/individual agreement with Wayne State University for a case registry, and Associate Editor for Open Forum Infectious Diseases (1 May 2022 through 30 April 2023). D. F. P. reports payment or honoraria as a speaker for an antibiotic course for UMC Utrecht and as a teacher for Hospital Pharmacists in training for PAO; and participation on DSMB for the COBRA trial (Very short-course versus standard course antibiotic therapy in patients with acute Cholangitis after adequate endoscopic biliaRy drainage) in the Netherlands. M. J. M. reports consulting fees from Insmed and Biomerieux; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Microsoft Diagnostics (MSD), Insmed, and Teva; support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Berlin Chemie; and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Biomerieux, Insmed, MSD. J. T. S. reports payment or honoraria for manuscript writing for Gilead on subjects not related to this manuscript. M. B. reports support from Pfizer for attending a congress. N. K. reports royalties or licenses from Up To Date; consulting fees from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Biotest, ExeViR, Hansa, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Glasgow Smith Kline, Novartis Pharma, Takeda; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Astellas, Biotest, CSL Behring, Chiesi, Novartis Pharma, Sanofi, Sandoz, Takeda; and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Astellas, Novartis Pharma, Takeda. N. J. M. reports support for attending meetings and/or travel paid to author from Biotest; unpaid participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for a CTX3 Study and paid participation on Advisory Boards for Takeda, MSD, and Pfizer. N. M. T. reports payment or honoraria for guest lecture for Boston Medical Center and Beth Israel Medical Center; payment for expert testimony for record review for Ficksman & Conley, LLP, in Boston, Massachusetts; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for United Network for Organ Sharing HIV Organ, Policy Equity (HOPE) Act Safety Review, and Workgroup (unpaid); role as Chair of the American Society of Transplantation and leadership or fiduciary role with Infectious Diseases Community of Practice (unpaid). O. M. reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from MSD; and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for MSD. S. Be. reports grants or contracts unrelated to this work from Vancouver Costal Health Research Institute and Transplant Research Foundation of BC; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Merck; and participation on an Advisory Board for Evusheld (AstraZeneca). All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: A growing body of observational evidence supports the value of ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) in managing infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed observational data on use and outcomes of CAZ-AVI therapy for infections caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) strains. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify variables independently associated with 30-day mortality. Results were adjusted for propensity score for receipt of CAZ-AVI combination regimens versus CAZ-AVI monotherapy., Results: The cohort comprised 577 adults with bloodstream infections (n = 391) or nonbacteremic infections involving mainly the urinary tract, lower respiratory tract, and intra-abdominal structures. All received treatment with CAZ-AVI alone (n = 165) or with ≥1 other active antimicrobials (n = 412). The all-cause mortality rate 30 days after infection onset was 25% (146/577). There was no significant difference in mortality between patients managed with CAZ-AVI alone and those treated with combination regimens (26.1% vs 25.0%, P = .79). In multivariate analysis, mortality was positively associated with presence at infection onset of septic shock (P = .002), neutropenia (P < .001), or an INCREMENT score ≥8 (P = .01); with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) (P = .04); and with CAZ-AVI dose adjustment for renal function (P = .01). Mortality was negatively associated with CAZ-AVI administration by prolonged infusion (P = .006). All associations remained significant after propensity score adjustment., Conclusions: CAZ-AVI is an important option for treating serious KPC-Kp infections, even when used alone. Further study is needed to explore the drug's seemingly more limited efficacy in LRTIs and potential survival benefits of prolonging CAZ-AVI infusions to ≥3 hours., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Patients colonized with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) are at higher risk of developing CRE infection after liver transplantation (LT), with associated high morbidity and mortality. Prediction model for CRE infection after LT among carriers could be useful to target preventive strategies., Methods: Multinational multicenter cohort study of consecutive adult patients underwent LT and colonized with CRE before or after LT, from January 2010 to December 2017. Risk factors for CRE infection were analyzed by univariate analysis and by Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model, with death as competing event. A nomogram to predict 30- and 60-day CRE infection risk was created., Results: A total of 840 LT recipients found to be colonized with CRE before (n = 203) or after (n = 637) LT were enrolled. CRE infection was diagnosed in 250 (29.7%) patients within 19 (interquartile range [IQR], 9-42) days after LT. Pre- and post-LT colonization, multisite post-LT colonization, prolonged mechanical ventilation, acute renal injury, and surgical reintervention were retained in the prediction model. Median 30- and 60-day predicted risk was 15% (IQR, 11-24) and 21% (IQR, 15-33), respectively. Discrimination and prediction accuracy for CRE infection was acceptable on derivation (area under the curve [AUC], 74.6; Brier index, 16.3) and bootstrapped validation dataset (AUC, 73.9; Brier index, 16.6). Decision-curve analysis suggested net benefit of model-directed intervention over default strategies (treat all, treat none) when CRE infection probability exceeded 10%. The risk prediction model is freely available as mobile application at https://idbologna.shinyapps.io/CREPostOLTPredictionModel/., Conclusions: Our clinical prediction tool could enable better targeting interventions for CRE infection after transplant., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) has been approved in Europe for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections, as well as hospital-acquired pneumonia, and for gram-negative infections with limited treatment options. CAZ-AVI displays in vitro activity against Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) enzyme producers, but clinical trial data on its efficacy in this setting are lacking., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 138 cases of infections caused by KPC-producing K. pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) in adults who received CAZ-AVI in compassionate-use programs in Italy. Case features and outcomes were analyzed, and survival was then specifically explored in the large subcohort whose infections were bacteremic., Results: The 138 patients started CAZ-AVI salvage therapy after a first-line treatment (median, 7 days) with other antimicrobials. CAZ-AVI was administered with at least 1 other active antibiotic in 109 (78.9%) cases. Thirty days after infection onset, 47 (34.1%) of the 138 patients had died. Thirty-day mortality among the 104 patients with bacteremic KPC-Kp infections was significantly lower than that of a matched cohort whose KPC-Kp bacteremia had been treated with drugs other than CAZ-AVI (36.5% vs 55.8%, P = .005). Multivariate analysis of the 208 cases of KPC-Kp bacteremia identified septic shock, neutropenia, Charlson comorbidity index ≥3, and recent mechanical ventilation as independent predictors of mortality, whereas receipt of CAZ-AVI was the sole independent predictor of survival., Conclusions: CAZ-AVI appears to be a promising drug for treatment of severe KPC-Kp infections, especially those involving bacteremia.