Search

ABSTRACT: Objectives: The main aim of this study was to evaluate the antibiofilm activity of cefiderocol alone and in combination with imipenem vs. sessile cells of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, assessing a potential synergistic bactericidal effect. Methods: Ten P. aeruginosa clinical isolates from infected implants and bloodstream were included in the study. Cefiderocol was tested alone and in combination with imipenem on 24-h-old P. aeruginosa biofilm formed on porous glass beads. For each antibiotic formulation, minimum bactericidal biofilm concentration (MBBC), defined as the lowest concentration that determined a reduction of at least 3 log10 CFU/mL compared with the untreated control, was evaluated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to investigate the biofilm of P. aeruginosa treated with cefiderocol, imipenem, or their combination. Results: Cefiderocol and imipenem were tested alone on P. aeruginosa biofilm and a reasonable reduction in the number of viable cells was observed, especially at high drug concentrations tested. The synergistic effect of cefiderocol in combination with imipenem was evaluated for five selected isolates. Cotreatment with the two drugs led to a remarkable reduction of cell viability by resulting in synergistic bactericidal activity in all tested strains and in synergistic eradicating activity in only one isolate. SEM analysis revealed that, in cefiderocol-treated biofilm, bacterial cells became more elongated than in the untreated control, forming filaments in which bacterial division seems to be inhibited. Conclusions: Cefiderocol exhibited an encouraging antibiofilm activity against tested strains, representing a valid option for the treatment of P. aeruginosa biofilm-associated infections, especially when administered in combination with imipenem.

The ESCMID-EUCIC guideline on decolonization of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria carriers does not recommend routine decolonization and highlights the necessity of well-powered and designed randomized clinical trials. Based on this limited evidence, we decided to conduct a scoping review with the aim of describing and discussing the last published studies investigating the efficacy and safety of decolonization therapies in drug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae carriers. Studies published in PubMed from January 1, 2017 to December 28, 2021 were retrieved. A PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) framework was used for article selection as follows: Population defined as any patient of any age in any setting with screening sample yielding for drug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae; Intervention defined as any decolonization; Controls defined as patients receiving no intervention (spontaneous decolonization) or a different decolonization therapy; Outcomes defined as a microbiological, clinical, epidemiological and adverse event. A total of 679 records were initially identified, of which 647 were excluded because they were not related to decolonization therapies. Other 18 records were excluded because not related to our aims, target bacteria, or study design. A total of 12 clinical studies were included, of which 4 were randomized clinical trials and 8 were non-randomized studies. The majority of studies evaluated selective decontamination of the digestive tract or selective oropharyngeal decontamination regimens. Selected studies were characterized by high heterogeneity. Further high-quality studies with proper design and sample size calculation are warranted.

Objectives: Ceftobiprole is a relatively new cephalosporin with broad-spectrum activity and good tolerability. Despite its promising characteristics, to our knowledge, only two case reports, previously published also by some of us, is available concerning its administration for the treatment of infective endocarditis. Hereby we report our experience in this field. Methods: All the patients with infective endocarditis treated with ceftobiprole were enrolled. Results: 12 cases of endocarditis were treated with ceftobiprole, 11/12 in combination with daptomycin and 1/12 as monotherapy. Gram-positive bacteria were isolated in 12/12 patients; 3 cases were polymicrobial. Cure rate was 83% (10/12 patients). In 9/12 (75%) cases, patients were switched to ceftobiprole following failure of previous antimicrobial regimen. In 3/3 patients in which ceftobiprole was administered because of persistently positive blood culture, bacteraemia clearance was rapidly achieved. Conclusions: Ceftobiprole, especially in combination, could be a promising alternative treatment for infective endocarditis.