Search

Contains fulltext : 299630.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVE: To describe whether contemporary dosing of antifungal drugs achieves therapeutic exposures in critically ill patients that are associated with optimal outcomes. Adequate antifungal therapy is a key determinant of survival of critically ill patients with fungal infections. Critical illness can alter an antifungal agents' pharmacokinetics, increasing the risk of inappropriate antifungal exposure that may lead to treatment failure and/or toxicity. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This international, multicentre, observational pharmacokinetic study will comprise adult critically ill patients prescribed antifungal agents including fluconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, isavuconazole, caspofungin, micafungin, anidulafungin, and amphotericin B for the treatment or prophylaxis of invasive fungal disease. A minimum of 12 patients are targeted for enrolment for each antifungal agent, across 12 countries and 30 intensive care units to perform descriptive pharmacokinetics. Pharmacokinetic sampling will occur during two dosing intervals (occasions): firstly, between days 1 and 3, and secondly, between days 4 and 7 of the antifungal course, collecting three samples per occasion. Patients' demographic and clinical data will be collected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint of the study is attainment of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target exposures that are associated with optimal efficacy. Thirty-day mortality will also be measured. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This study will describe whether contemporary antifungal drug dosing achieves drug exposures associated with optimal outcomes. Data will also be used for the development of antifungal dosing algorithms for critically ill patients. Optimised drug dosing should be considered a priority for improving clinical outcomes for critically ill patients with fungal infections.

Contains fulltext : 283003.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 283003.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 218605.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) is defined as the discontinuation of one or more components of combination empirical therapy, and/or the change from a broad-spectrum to a narrower spectrum antimicrobial. It is most commonly recommended in the intensive care unit (ICU) patient who is treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics as a strategy to reduce antimicrobial pressure of empirical broad-spectrum therapy and prevent antimicrobial resistance, yet this has not been convincingly demonstrated in a clinical setting. Even if it appears beneficial, ADE may have some unwanted side effects: it has been associated with prolongation of antimicrobial therapy and could inappropriately be used as a justification for unrestricted broadness of empirical therapy. Also, exposing a patient to multiple, sequential antimicrobials could have unwanted effects on the microbiome. For these reasons, ADE has important shortcomings to be promoted as a quality indicator for appropriate antimicrobial use in the ICU. Despite this, ADE clearly has a role in the management of infections in the ICU. The most appropriate use of ADE is in patients with microbiologically confirmed infections requiring longer antimicrobial therapy. ADE should be used as an integral part of an ICU antimicrobial stewardship approach in which it is guided by optimal specimen quality and relevance. Rapid diagnostics may further assist in avoiding unnecessary initiation of broad-spectrum therapy, which in turn will decrease the need for subsequent ADE.

Contains fulltext : 225430.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), PURPOSE: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. METHODS: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. RESULTS: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14-1.64). CONCLUSION: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely.

Contains fulltext : 218605.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) is defined as the discontinuation of one or more components of combination empirical therapy, and/or the change from a broad-spectrum to a narrower spectrum antimicrobial. It is most commonly recommended in the intensive care unit (ICU) patient who is treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics as a strategy to reduce antimicrobial pressure of empirical broad-spectrum therapy and prevent antimicrobial resistance, yet this has not been convincingly demonstrated in a clinical setting. Even if it appears beneficial, ADE may have some unwanted side effects: it has been associated with prolongation of antimicrobial therapy and could inappropriately be used as a justification for unrestricted broadness of empirical therapy. Also, exposing a patient to multiple, sequential antimicrobials could have unwanted effects on the microbiome. For these reasons, ADE has important shortcomings to be promoted as a quality indicator for appropriate antimicrobial use in the ICU. Despite this, ADE clearly has a role in the management of infections in the ICU. The most appropriate use of ADE is in patients with microbiologically confirmed infections requiring longer antimicrobial therapy. ADE should be used as an integral part of an ICU antimicrobial stewardship approach in which it is guided by optimal specimen quality and relevance. Rapid diagnostics may further assist in avoiding unnecessary initiation of broad-spectrum therapy, which in turn will decrease the need for subsequent ADE.

Contains fulltext : 225430.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), PURPOSE: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. METHODS: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. RESULTS: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14-1.64). CONCLUSION: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely.

Contains fulltext : 218605.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) is defined as the discontinuation of one or more components of combination empirical therapy, and/or the change from a broad-spectrum to a narrower spectrum antimicrobial. It is most commonly recommended in the intensive care unit (ICU) patient who is treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics as a strategy to reduce antimicrobial pressure of empirical broad-spectrum therapy and prevent antimicrobial resistance, yet this has not been convincingly demonstrated in a clinical setting. Even if it appears beneficial, ADE may have some unwanted side effects: it has been associated with prolongation of antimicrobial therapy and could inappropriately be used as a justification for unrestricted broadness of empirical therapy. Also, exposing a patient to multiple, sequential antimicrobials could have unwanted effects on the microbiome. For these reasons, ADE has important shortcomings to be promoted as a quality indicator for appropriate antimicrobial use in the ICU. Despite this, ADE clearly has a role in the management of infections in the ICU. The most appropriate use of ADE is in patients with microbiologically confirmed infections requiring longer antimicrobial therapy. ADE should be used as an integral part of an ICU antimicrobial stewardship approach in which it is guided by optimal specimen quality and relevance. Rapid diagnostics may further assist in avoiding unnecessary initiation of broad-spectrum therapy, which in turn will decrease the need for subsequent ADE.

Contains fulltext : 225430.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), PURPOSE: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. METHODS: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. RESULTS: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14-1.64). CONCLUSION: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely.

Contains fulltext : 202896.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: The reliability of diagnostic criteria for invasive fungal diseases (IFD) developed for severely immunocompromised patients is questionable in critically ill adult patients in intensive care units (ICU). OBJECTIVES: To develop a standard set of definitions for IFD in critically ill adult patients in ICU. METHODS: Based on a systematic literature review, a list of potential definitions to be applied to ICU patients will be developed by the ESCMID Study Group for Infections in Critically Ill Patients (ESGCIP) and the ESCMID Fungal Infection Study Group (EFISG) chairpersons. The proposed definitions will be evaluated by a panel of 30 experts using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness methods. The panel will rank each of the proposed definitions on a 1-9 scale trough a dedicated questionnaire, in two rounds: one remote and one face-to-face. Based on their median rank and the level of agreement across panel members, selected definitions will be organised in a main consensus document and in an executive summary. The executive summary will be made available online for public comments. CONCLUSIONS: The present consensus project will seek to provide standard definitions for IFD in critically ill adult patients in ICU, with the ultimate aims of improving their clinical outcome and facilitating the comparison and generalizability of research findings.

Contains fulltext : 202896.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: The reliability of diagnostic criteria for invasive fungal diseases (IFD) developed for severely immunocompromised patients is questionable in critically ill adult patients in intensive care units (ICU). OBJECTIVES: To develop a standard set of definitions for IFD in critically ill adult patients in ICU. METHODS: Based on a systematic literature review, a list of potential definitions to be applied to ICU patients will be developed by the ESCMID Study Group for Infections in Critically Ill Patients (ESGCIP) and the ESCMID Fungal Infection Study Group (EFISG) chairpersons. The proposed definitions will be evaluated by a panel of 30 experts using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness methods. The panel will rank each of the proposed definitions on a 1-9 scale trough a dedicated questionnaire, in two rounds: one remote and one face-to-face. Based on their median rank and the level of agreement across panel members, selected definitions will be organised in a main consensus document and in an executive summary. The executive summary will be made available online for public comments. CONCLUSIONS: The present consensus project will seek to provide standard definitions for IFD in critically ill adult patients in ICU, with the ultimate aims of improving their clinical outcome and facilitating the comparison and generalizability of research findings.

Contains fulltext : 174457.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Critically ill patients with severe infections are at high risk of suboptimal antimicrobial dosing. The pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of antimicrobials in these patients differ significantly from the patient groups from whose data the conventional dosing regimens were developed. Use of such regimens often results in inadequate antimicrobial concentrations at the site of infection and is associated with poor patient outcomes. In this article, we describe the potential of in vitro and in vivo infection models, clinical pharmacokinetic data and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models to guide the design of more effective antimicrobial dosing regimens. Individualised dosing, based on population PK models and patient factors (e.g. renal function and weight) known to influence antimicrobial PK, increases the probability of achieving therapeutic drug exposures while at the same time avoiding toxic concentrations. When therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is applied, early dose adaptation to the needs of the individual patient is possible. TDM is likely to be of particular importance for infected critically ill patients, where profound PK changes are present and prompt appropriate antibiotic therapy is crucial. In the light of the continued high mortality rates in critically ill patients with severe infections, a paradigm shift to refined dosing strategies for antimicrobials is warranted to enhance the probability of achieving drug concentrations that increase the likelihood of clinical success.

Contains fulltext : 177987.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. RESULTS: The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p < 0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). CONCLUSION: T

Contains fulltext : 174457.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Critically ill patients with severe infections are at high risk of suboptimal antimicrobial dosing. The pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of antimicrobials in these patients differ significantly from the patient groups from whose data the conventional dosing regimens were developed. Use of such regimens often results in inadequate antimicrobial concentrations at the site of infection and is associated with poor patient outcomes. In this article, we describe the potential of in vitro and in vivo infection models, clinical pharmacokinetic data and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models to guide the design of more effective antimicrobial dosing regimens. Individualised dosing, based on population PK models and patient factors (e.g. renal function and weight) known to influence antimicrobial PK, increases the probability of achieving therapeutic drug exposures while at the same time avoiding toxic concentrations. When therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is applied, early dose adaptation to the needs of the individual patient is possible. TDM is likely to be of particular importance for infected critically ill patients, where profound PK changes are present and prompt appropriate antibiotic therapy is crucial. In the light of the continued high mortality rates in critically ill patients with severe infections, a paradigm shift to refined dosing strategies for antimicrobials is warranted to enhance the probability of achieving drug concentrations that increase the likelihood of clinical success.

Contains fulltext : 177987.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. RESULTS: The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p < 0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). CONCLUSION: T

Contains fulltext : 168575.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients. The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance. The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria. An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

Contains fulltext : 168575.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients. The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance. The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria. An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

Contains fulltext : 168575.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients. The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance. The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria. An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Infectious complications are frequent in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) but multinational epidemiologic data are lacking. The aim of the study was to analyze the characteristics of the infectious complications and antimicrobial use in this setting. METHODS: One-day point prevalence study of infection in critically ill patients (Extended Prevalence of Infection in the ICU-II study), performed in 1,265 ICUs in 75 countries. RESULTS: Of the 13,796 patients in the study, 159 were admitted with SAP. One-hundred sixteen (73%) had infections: 31% intra-abdominal, 16% extra-abdominal, and 26% both. Gram-negative bacteria were more prevalent than gram-positive organisms, anaerobes, or fungi. Therapeutically, penicillins and other beta-lactams were used most frequently. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered to 24% of the patients with SAP. CONCLUSIONS: Infections are frequent in patients admitted with SAP; most are intra-abdominal infections. Microbiology is diverse with gram-negative micro-organisms most frequently isolated. Most patients admitted to the ICU for SAP receive antibiotics at some point.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Infectious complications are frequent in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) but multinational epidemiologic data are lacking. The aim of the study was to analyze the characteristics of the infectious complications and antimicrobial use in this setting. METHODS: One-day point prevalence study of infection in critically ill patients (Extended Prevalence of Infection in the ICU-II study), performed in 1,265 ICUs in 75 countries. RESULTS: Of the 13,796 patients in the study, 159 were admitted with SAP. One-hundred sixteen (73%) had infections: 31% intra-abdominal, 16% extra-abdominal, and 26% both. Gram-negative bacteria were more prevalent than gram-positive organisms, anaerobes, or fungi. Therapeutically, penicillins and other beta-lactams were used most frequently. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered to 24% of the patients with SAP. CONCLUSIONS: Infections are frequent in patients admitted with SAP; most are intra-abdominal infections. Microbiology is diverse with gram-negative micro-organisms most frequently isolated. Most patients admitted to the ICU for SAP receive antibiotics at some point.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Infectious complications are frequent in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) but multinational epidemiologic data are lacking. The aim of the study was to analyze the characteristics of the infectious complications and antimicrobial use in this setting. METHODS: One-day point prevalence study of infection in critically ill patients (Extended Prevalence of Infection in the ICU-II study), performed in 1,265 ICUs in 75 countries. RESULTS: Of the 13,796 patients in the study, 159 were admitted with SAP. One-hundred sixteen (73%) had infections: 31% intra-abdominal, 16% extra-abdominal, and 26% both. Gram-negative bacteria were more prevalent than gram-positive organisms, anaerobes, or fungi. Therapeutically, penicillins and other beta-lactams were used most frequently. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered to 24% of the patients with SAP. CONCLUSIONS: Infections are frequent in patients admitted with SAP; most are intra-abdominal infections. Microbiology is diverse with gram-negative micro-organisms most frequently isolated. Most patients admitted to the ICU for SAP receive antibiotics at some point.