Search

Objective: To determine whether the β-lactam allergy delabeling was safe and cost-saving in Primary Care (PC) patients., Design: We have conducted a retrospective chart review of PC patients with β-lactam allergy label evaluated in our Allergy Unit between 2017 and 2022. SITE: Allergy Department. Hospital Virgen del Rocio (Sevilla)., Participants: A total of 391 patients labeled for β-lactam allergy in PC were studied., Main Measurements: (a) Outcome evaluation of a β-lactam allergy delabeling procedure. (b) A ratio between the total e-prescribed antibiotic cost and the number of treatment days (the experimental daily antibiotic cost or EDAC) before and after delabeling was analyzed in delabeled and truly allergic patients., Results: The results of skin testing were positive in 9.2% of the reported cases (36 of 391 patients). The reactions to oral provocation challenge (OPC) occurred in 2.14% of the patients who underwent negative skin testing to offending β-lactam (in 15 of 699 OPC). A total of 307 patients (78.5%) were delabeled; 70 (17.9%) had a β-lactam selective response and 14 (3.59%) reacted to both penicillin and cephalosporin. The EDAC before and after the procedure in delabeled patients was significantly lower (0.88 € vs 0.62 €, p<10 -3 ), than that observed in truly allergic group (0.87 € vs. 0.76 €, p=not significant)., Conclusion: To delabel β-lactam allergy in Primary Care patients is safe in most patients, cost-saving in antibioticotherapy, and allows identify the main clinical β-lactam allergy phenotypes that benefit from this procedure., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Publicado por Elsevier España S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with a penicillin allergy label are at risk of an associated increase in adverse antibiotic events and hospitalization costs., Aim: We aimed to study the economic savings derived from the correct diagnosis and delabeling inpatients with suspected beta-lactam allergy, considering the acquisition cost of antimicrobials prescribed during a patient's hospital stay., Method: We prospectively evaluated patients admitted to the University Hospital of Salamanca who had been labeled as allergic to beta-lactams and performed a delabeling study. Subsequently, cost differences between antibiotics administered before and after the allergy study and those derived from those patients who received alternative antibiotics during admission and those who switched to beta-lactams after the allergy study were calculated., Results: One hundred seventy-seven inpatients labeled as allergic to beta-lactams underwent a delabeling study; 34 (19.2%) were confirmed to have allergy to beta-lactams. Of the total number of patients, 136 (76.8%) received antibiotics during their hospitalization, involving a mean (SD) cost of €203.07 (318.42) and a median (IQR) cost of €88.97 (48.86-233.56). After delabeling in 85 (62.5%) patients, the antibiotic treatment was changed to beta-lactams. In this group of patients, the mean cost (SD) decreased from €188.91 (351.09) before the change to 91.31 (136.07) afterward, and the median cost (IQR) decreased from €72.92 (45.82-211.99) to €19.24 (11.66-168). The reduction was significant compared to the median cost of patients whose treatment was not changed to beta-lactams (p<0.001)., Conclusion: Delabeling hospitalized patients represents a cost-saving measure for treating patients labeled as allergic to beta-lactams., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Abstract: Pathophysiological changes are important risk factors for critically ill patients with pneumonia manifesting sub-therapeutic antibiotic exposures during empirical treatment. The effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on antibiotic dosing requirements is uncertain. We aimed to determine the effect of COVID-19 on ß-lactam pharmacokinetics (PK) and PK target attainment in critically ill patients with a personalized dosing strategy.Retrospective, single-center analysis of COVID-19 ± critically ill patients with pneumonia (community-acquired pneumonia or hospital-acquired pneumonia) who received continuous infusion of a ß-lactam antibiotic with dosing personalized through dosing software and therapeutic drug monitoring. A therapeutic exposure was defined as serum concentration between (css) 4 to 8 times the EUCAST non-species related breakpoint).Data from 58 patients with pneumonia was analyzed. Nineteen patients were tested COVID-19-positive before the start of the antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia or hospital-acquired pneumonia. Therapeutic exposure was achieved in 71% of COVID-19 patients (68% considering all patients). All patients demonstrated css above the non-species-related breakpoint. Twenty percent exceeded css above the target range (24% of all patients). The median ß-lactam clearance was 49% compared to ß-lactam clearance in a standard patient without a significant difference regarding antibiotic, time of sampling or present COVID-19 infection. Median daily doses were 50% lower compared to standard bolus dosing.COVID-19 did not significantly affect ß-lactam pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients. Personalized ß-lactam dosing strategies were safe in critically ill patients and lead to high PK target attainment with less resources., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Shortening the duration of antibiotic therapy for patients admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia should help reduce antibiotic consumption and thus bacterial resistance, adverse events, and related costs. We aimed to assess the need for an additional 5-day course of β-lactam therapy among patients with community-acquired pneumonia who were stable after 3 days of treatment., Methods: We did this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial (the Pneumonia Short Treatment [PTC]) in 16 centres in France. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia (defined as patients admitted to a non-critical care unit) and who met prespecified clinical stability criteria after 3 days of treatment with β-lactam therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive β-lactam therapy (oral amoxicillin 1 g plus clavulanate 125 mg three times a day) or matched placebo for 5 extra days. Randomisation was done using a web-based system with permuted blocks with random sizes and stratified by randomisation site and Pneumonia Severity Index score. Participants, clinicians, and study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cure 15 days after first antibiotic intake, defined by apyrexia (temperature ≤37·8°C), resolution or improvement of respiratory symptoms, and no additional antibiotic treatment for any cause. A non-inferiority margin of 10 percentage points was chosen. The primary outcome was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received any treatment (intention-to-treat [ITT] population) and in all patients who received their assigned treatment (per-protocol population). Safety was assessed in the ITT population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01963442, and is now complete., Findings: Between Dec 19, 2013, and Feb 1, 2018, 706 patients were assessed for eligibility, and after 3 days of β-lactam treatment, 310 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either placebo (n=157) or β-lactam treatment (n=153). Seven patients withdrew consent before taking any study drug, five in the placebo group and two in the β-lactam group. In the ITT population, median age was 73·0 years (IQR 57·0-84·0) and 123 (41%) of 303 participants were female. In the ITT analysis, cure at day 15 occurred in 117 (77%) of 152 participants in the placebo group and 102 (68%) of 151 participants in the β-lactam group (between-group difference of 9·42%, 95% CI -0·38 to 20·04), indicating non-inferiority. In the per-protocol analysis, 113 (78%) of 145 participants in the placebo treatment group and 100 (68%) of 146 participants in the β-lactam treatment group were cured at day 15 (difference of 9·44% [95% CI -0·15 to 20·34]), indicating non-inferiority. Incidence of adverse events was similar between the treatment groups (22 [14%] of 152 in the placebo group and 29 [19%] of 151 in the β-lactam group). The most common adverse events were digestive disorders, reported in 17 (11%) of 152 patients in the placebo group and 28 (19%) of 151 patients in the β-lactam group. By day 30, three (2%) patients had died in the placebo group (one due to bacteraemia due to Staphylococcus aureus, one due to cardiogenic shock after acute pulmonary oedema, and one due to heart failure associated with acute renal failure) and two (1%) in the β-lactam group (due to pneumonia recurrence and possible acute pulmonary oedema)., Interpretation: Among patients admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia who met clinical stability criteria, discontinuing β-lactam treatment after 3 days was non-inferior to 8 days of treatment. These findings could allow substantial reduction of antibiotic consumption., Funding: French Ministry of Health., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The increasing incidence of infections caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)/AmpC-producing bacteria leads to increasing use of carbapenems and risk of carbapenem resistance. Treatment success of carbapenem-sparing beta-lactams (CSBs) for ESBL infections is unclear. The aim of this study was to appraise the clinical cure rate and estimate the cost-effectiveness of meropenem vs. CSBs (piperacillin-tazobactam, temocillin, ceftazidime-avibactam, and ceftolozane-tazobactam) for urinary tract infections (UTIs) or intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) due to ESBL/AmpC-producing bacteria. A systematic literature search of the Cochrane library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies assessing the clinical cure rate of the antibiotics. To assess the cost-effectiveness of CSBs vs. meropenem, a combined decision analytic and Markov model was probabilistically analysed over a 5-year period. The main outcome was presented as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and evaluated with a threshold of €20 000 per life year gained (LYG). From 656 identified articles, 17 and 14 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and quantitative synthesis, respectively. A clinical cure of ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam was comparable to meropenem in patients with complicated IAIs (cIAIs) due to ESBL (Risk ratio [RR]=1·04, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0·95-1·13). Both temocillin and ceftolozane-tazobactam were deemed cost-effective compared to meropenem with €157·58 and €13 398·34 per LYG, respectively, in patients with UTIs due to ESBL. However, only ceftazidime-avibactam (plus metronidazole) was cost-effective for the treatment of IAIs, with €16 916·77 per LYG. These results show that several CSBs can be considered as viable candidates for the treatment of UTIs and IAIs caused by ESBL., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Antimicrobial resistance in bacteria is frightening, especially resistance in Gram-negative Bacteria (GNB). In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a list of 12 bacteria that represent a threat to human health, and among these, a majority of GNB. Antibiotic resistance is a complex and relatively old phenomenon that is the consequence of several factors. The first factor is the vertiginous drop in research and development of new antibacterials. In fact, many companies simply stop this R&D activity. The finding is simple: there are enough antibiotics to treat the different types of infection that clinicians face. The second factor is the appearance and spread of resistant or even multidrug-resistant bacteria. For a long time, this situation remained rather confidential, almost anecdotal. It was not until the end of the 1980s that awareness emerged. It was the time of Vancomycin-Resistance Enterococci (VRE), and the threat of Vancomycin-Resistant MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus ). After this, there has been renewed interest but only in anti-Gram positive antibacterials. Today, the threat is GNB, and we have no new molecules with innovative mechanism of action to fight effectively against these bugs. However, the war against antimicrobial resistance is not lost. We must continue the fight, which requires a better knowledge of the mechanisms of action of anti-infectious agents and concomitantly the mechanisms of resistance of infectious agents.

Background: An increasing amount of evidence supports antibiotic therapy for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The objective of this study was to compare the costs of antibiotics alone versus appendicectomy in treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis within the randomized controlled APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial., Methods: The APPAC multicentre, non-inferiority RCT was conducted on patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients were assigned randomly to appendicectomy or antibiotic treatment. All costs were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis during the 1-year follow-up. The cost estimates were based on cost levels for the year 2012., Results: Some 273 patients were assigned to the appendicectomy group and 257 to antibiotic treatment. Most patients randomized to antibiotic treatment did not require appendicectomy during the 1-year follow-up. In the operative group, overall societal costs (€5989·2, 95 per cent c.i. 5787·3 to 6191·1) were 1·6 times higher (€2244·8, 1940·5 to 2549·1) than those in the antibiotic group (€3744·4, 3514·6 to 3974·2). In both groups, productivity losses represented a slightly higher proportion of overall societal costs than all treatment costs together, with diagnostics and medicines having a minor role. Those in the operative group were prescribed significantly more sick leave than those in the antibiotic group (mean(s.d.) 17·0(8·3) (95 per cent c.i. 16·0 to 18·0) versus 9·2(6·9) (8·3 to 10·0) days respectively; P < 0·001). When the age and sex of the patient as well as the hospital were controlled for simultaneously, the operative treatment generated significantly more costs in all models., Conclusion: Patients receiving antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis incurred lower costs than those who had surgery., (© 2017 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

During October-December 2015, 29 patients in a hospital in the Netherlands acquired nosocomial infection with a multidrug-resistant, New Delhi-metallo-β-lactamase-positive Klebsiella pneumoniae strain. Extensive infection control measures were needed to stop this outbreak. The estimated economic impact of the outbreak was $804,263; highest costs were associated with hospital bed closures.

Background: Appendicitis is a common surgical emergency in pediatric patients, and broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy is warranted in their care. A simplified once-daily regimen of ceftriaxone and metronidazole (CTX plus MTZ) is cost effective in perforated patients. The goal of this evaluation is to compare a historic regimen of cefoxitin (CFX) in nonperforated cases and ertapenem (ERT) in perforated and abscessed cases with CTX plus MTZ for all cases in terms of efficacy and cost., Methods: A retrospective review compared outcomes of nonperforated, perforated, and abscessed cases who received the historic regimen or CTX plus MTZ. Length of stay, time to afebrile, time to full feeds, postoperative abscess, and wound infection rates, inpatient readmissions, and antibiotic costs were evaluated., Results: There were a total of 841 cases reviewed (494 nonperforated, 247 perforated, and 100 abscessed). Overall, the CTX plus MTZ group had a shorter time to afebrile (P < .001). Treatment groups did not differ in length of stay. Postoperative abscess rates were similar between groups (4.1% vs 3.3%, not significant). Other postoperative complications were similar between groups. Total antibiotic cost savings were over $110 000 during the study period (from November 2010 to June 2013)., Conclusions: Both CFX and/or ERT and CTX plus MTZ result in low abscess and complication rates, suggesting both are effective strategies. Treatment with CTX plus MTZ results in a shorter time to afebrile, while also providing significant antibiotic cost savings. Ceftriaxone plus MTZ is a streamlined, cost-effective regimen in the treatment of nonperforated, perforated, and abscessed appendicitis., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: To determine the cost-effectiveness of strategies of preferred antibiotic treatment with beta-lactam/macrolide combination or fluoroquinolone monotherapy compared to beta-lactam monotherapy., Methods: Costs and effects were estimated using data from a cluster-randomized cross-over trial of antibiotic treatment strategies, primarily from the reduced third payer perspective (i.e. hospital admission costs). Cost-minimization analysis (CMA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) were performed using linear mixed models. CMA results were expressed as difference in costs per patient. CEA results were expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) showing additional costs per prevented death., Results: A total of 2,283 patients were included. Crude average costs within 90 days from the reduced third payer perspective were €4,294, €4,392, and €4,002 per patient for the beta-lactam monotherapy, beta-lactam/macrolide combination, and fluoroquinolone monotherapy strategy, respectively. CMA results were €106 (95% CI €-697 to €754) for the beta-lactam/macrolide combination strategy and €-278 (95%CI €-991 to €396) for the fluoroquinolone monotherapy strategy, both compared to the beta-lactam monotherapy strategy. The ICER was not statistically significantly different between the strategies. Other perspectives yielded similar results., Conclusions: There were no significant differences in cost-effectiveness of strategies of preferred antibiotic treatment of CAP on non-ICU wards with either beta-lactam monotherapy, beta-lactam/macrolide combination therapy, or fluoroquinolone monotherapy., Trial Registration: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01660204 , on May 2nd, 2012.

Treatment for community-acquired pneumonia in immunocompetent adults is mainly empirical. Beta-lactam antibiotics have been traditionally considered first-line therapy. New antibiotics could be more effective but the evidence is not clear until now, and its use could entail greater costs, an increase in bacterial resistance and other adverse effects. Searching in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening 30 databases, we identified six systematic reviews including 36 randomized trials addressing this question. We combined the evidence using meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table following the GRADE approach. We concluded new antibiotics are not better than beta-lactam antibiotics for the treatment of non-critical inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia in relation to clinical failure or adverse effects.

Purpose: To study characteristics of patients with community-acquired complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) and to compare effectiveness and antibiotic cost of treatment with ceftriaxone (CRO), levofloxacin (LVX), and ertapenem (ETP)., Methods: This retrospective study enrolled patients who had community-acquired cUTIs admitted to Division of Infectious Diseases in a single medical center from January 2011 to March 2013. Effectiveness, antibiotic cost, and clinical characteristics were compared among patients treated with CRO, LVX, and ETP., Results: There were 358 eligible cases, including 139 who received CRO, 128 treated with ETP, and 91 with LVX. The most common pathogen was Escherichia coli. The susceptibilities of these three agents were higher and more superior than first-line antibiotics. Treatment with ETP was associated with a significantly shorter time to defervescence since admission (CRO: 39 hours, ETP: 30 hours, and LVX: 38 h; p = 0.031) and shorter hospitalization stay (CRO: 4 days, ETP: 3 days, and LVX: 4 days; p < 0.001). However, the average antibiotic costs in the CRO group were significantly lower than that in the other two groups [CRO: 62.4 United States dollars (USD), ETP: 185.33 USD, and LVX: 204.85 USD; p < 0.001]., Conclusion: The resistance of cUTIs isolates to first-line antibiotic is high. Using ETP, CRO, and LVX in the treatment of cUTIs for good clinical response should be suggested. Among the three agents, ETP had better susceptibility than CRO and LVX, reached defervescence sooner, and was associated with shorter hospital stays. However, using CRO in cUTIs was less expensive than the other two agents., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose: An evaluation of the clinical and economic impact of an antimicrobial stewardship quality initiative (ASQI) focusing on allergy assessment in patients with a documented β-lactam allergy prescribed aztreonam was conducted., Methods: This retrospective study was executed at a hospital with an interdisciplinary antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP). A total of 186 patients with self-reported β-lactam allergies who were prescribed aztreonam while admitted during a 36-month time period surrounding the ASQI implementation were included. The primary study outcome was median time in hours to aztreonam discontinuation among nonanaphylactic patients., Results: After implementation of the ASQI, the percentage of patients continued on aztreonam for the duration of therapy was nearly cut in half, and a greater percentage of patients were switched to β-lactam antibiotics. No adverse effects associated with β-lactam therapy were observed in any study patient. Antimicrobial cost savings was not associated with any difference in clinical outcomes. Overall, hospitalwide aztreonam prescribing and aztreonam use declined. Institutional aztreonam orders per 1000 patient-days decreased from 1.5 to 1 after implementation of the ASQI. Additionally, hospitalwide aztreonam days of therapy per 1000 patient-days was reduced from 3.6 in the pre-ASQI period to 1.8 in the post-ASQI period., Conclusion: An ASQI that included critical evaluation of patient-reported β-lactam allergies led to decreased aztreonam use, reduced antimicrobial expenditure, and similar clinical outcomes to those observed before implementation., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Most children diagnosed with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are treated in the outpatient setting. The objective of this study was to determine the comparative clinical effectiveness of beta-lactam monotherapy and macrolide monotherapy in this population., Study Design: Children, 1-18 years old, with a clinical diagnosis of CAP at an outpatient practice affiliated (n = 71) with Geisinger Health System during January 1, 2008 to January 31, 2010 were eligible. The primary exposure was receipt of beta-lactam or macrolide monotherapy. The primary outcome was treatment failure defined as change in antibiotic prescription within 14 days of the initial pneumonia diagnosis. Propensity scores were used to determine the likelihood of receiving macrolide monotherapy. Treatment groups were matched 1:1, based on propensity score, age group and asthma status. Multivariable conditional logistic regression models estimated the association between macrolide monotherapy and treatment failures., Results: Of 1999 children with CAP, 1164 were matched. In the matched cohorts, 24% of children had asthma. Patients who received macrolide monotherapy had no statistical difference in treatment failure regardless of age when compared with patients who received beta-lactam monotherapy., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that children diagnosed with CAP in the outpatient setting and treated with beta-lactam or macrolide monotherapy have the same likelihood to fail treatment regardless of age.

Background and Objective: The microbial susceptibility of many antibiotics has been affected by prescribing patterns and their extensive use. The purpose of this evaluation was to assess how these changes could affect the initial efficacy of ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) acquired in the community and the potential consequences this may have in healthcare costs in Spain., Methods: The Initial efficacy of ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam for patients with APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) II scores <10 was extracted from a multicenter randomized study and were combined with the current microbial susceptibilities obtained from the SMART study, a multinational surveillance program. Country-specific pathogens distribution was extracted from a national study in patients with community-acquired IAI. The estimated effectiveness was used in a decision-analytic model to compare total costs between ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated IAI. The model performs extensive one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses., Results: The model suggested a savings of €209 (year 2012 values) per patient when complicated IAIs acquired in the community (APACHE II <10) were treated with ertapenem instead of piperacillin/tazobactam. One-way sensitivity analyses showed length of stay as the key driver parameter. Further analysis of this parameter and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of our evaluation, with a 58% likelihood of ertapenem being dominant., Conclusions: Ertapenem appears to be a cost-saving strategy over piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of patients with complicated IAIs acquired in the community in Spain.

Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are a growing health problem, and uncertainties exist regarding the optimal therapy for bloodstream infection due to VRE. We conducted systematic comparative evaluations of the impact of different antimicrobial therapies on the outcomes of patients with bloodstream infections due to VRE. A retrospective study from January 2008 to October 2010 was conducted at Detroit Medical Center. Unique patients with blood cultures due to VRE were included and reviewed. Three major therapeutic classes were analyzed: daptomycin, linezolid, and β-lactams. Three multivariate models were conducted for each outcome, matching for a propensity score predicting the likelihood of receipt of one of the therapeutic classes. A total of 225 cases of bacteremia due to VRE were included, including 86 (38.2%) cases of VR Enterococcus faecalis and 139 (61.8%) of VR Enterococcus faecium. Bacteremia due to VR E. faecalis was more frequent among subjects treated with β-lactams than among those treated with daptomycin or linezolid. The median dose of daptomycin was 6 mg/kg of body weight (range, 6 to 12 mg/kg). After controlling for propensity score and bacteremia due to VR E. faecalis, differences in mortality were nonsignificant among the treatment groups. Therapy with daptomycin was associated with higher median variable direct cost per day than that for linezolid. This large study revealed the three therapeutic classes (daptomycin, linezolid, and β-lactams) are similarly efficacious in the treatment of bacteremia due to susceptible strains of VRE., (Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Although the standard treatment of acute appendicitis (AA) consists of an early appendectomy, there has recently been both an interest and an increase in the use of antibiotic therapy as the primary treatment for uncomplicated AA. However, the use of antibiotic therapy in the treatment of uncomplicated AA is still controversial., Methods/design: The APPAC trial is a randomized prospective controlled, open label, non-inferiority multicenter trial designed to compare antibiotic therapy (ertapenem) with emergency appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated AA. The primary endpoint of the study is the success of the randomized treatment. In the antibiotic treatment arm successful treatment is defined as being discharged from the hospital without the need for surgical intervention and no recurrent appendicitis during a minimum follow-up of one-year (treatment efficacy). Treatment efficacy in the operative treatment arm is defined as successful appendectomy evaluated to be 100%. Secondary endpoints are post-intervention complications, overall morbidity and mortality, the length of hospital stay and sick leave, treatment costs and pain scores (VAS, visual analoque scale). A maximum of 610 adult patients (aged 18-60 years) with a CT scan confirmed uncomplicated AA will be enrolled from six hospitals and randomized by a closed envelope method in a 1:1 ratio either to undergo emergency appendectomy or to receive ertapenem (1 g per day) for three days continued by oral levofloxacin (500 mg per day) plus metronidazole (1.5 g per day) for seven days. Follow-up by a telephone interview will be at 1 week, 2 months and 1, 3, 5 and 10 years; the primary and secondary endpoints of the trial will be evaluated at each time point., Discussion: The APPAC trial aims to provide level I evidence to support the hypothesis that approximately 75-85% of patients with uncomplicated AA can be treated with effective antibiotic therapy avoiding unnecessary appendectomies and the related operative morbidity, also resulting in major cost savings.

Purpose: A national survey was conducted to evaluate the use of continuous and extended infusions for administering β-lactams and vancomycin., Methods: The survey was sent to a random sample of 1000 acute care hospital pharmacists in the United States to evaluate the use of continuous and extended infusions of antibiotics. In addition, the same survey was sent to members of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP) to assess the adoption of these infusion strategies., Results: In the random-sample survey, 29 (11.2%) and 15 (5.8%) hospitals reported using continuous and extended infusions, respectively. Common rationales for adopting continuous and extended infusions were greater efficacy, equal or less toxicity, and cost savings. The SIDP survey revealed that 30 (50%) and 21 (35%) of responding pharmacists have initiated continuous and extended infusions, respectively. Common rationales for adopting continuous and extended infusions were greater efficacy, equal or less toxicity, and cost savings. Both surveys found that penicillins were the antibiotics most frequently administered as continuous and extended infusions., Conclusion: The results of a survey sent to a random sample of hospital pharmacists and to SIDP members indicated that the majority did not use either continuous or extended infusions of antibiotics. SIDP survey respondents more frequently reported the use of both continuous and extended infusions than the respondents of the random-sample survey, and the percentage of time above the minimum inhibitory concentration was the most frequently assessed pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameter for both groups.

The optimal dosage and administration of antibiotics are not only important measures to combat antimicrobial resistance, but they are also integral to antimicrobial stewardship. In light of a diminishing antibiotic pipeline and an alarming rise in resistance, the optimal dosage and administration of antimicrobial agents have been under a great deal of scrutiny. Prolonged infusions of β-lactam antibiotics have been proposed as an alternate dosing strategy. To summarize the evidence on prolonged infusions of β-lactam agents and provide their clinical implications for antimicrobial stewardship, we performed a MEDLINE search (1950-2011) of all relevant articles. This article provides a review of data from Monte Carlo simulations, clinical outcome analyses, and pharmacoeconomic studies. Furthermore, protocol implementation strategies are discussed to address antimicrobial stewardship., (© 2012 Pharmacotherapy Publications, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Ertapenem is a broad spectrum carbapenem approved for the treatment of postpartum endometritis. Data regarding clinical outcomes after treatment with ertapenem for endometritis after cesarean delivery are limited. Our objectives were to compare clinical outcomes and cost of ertapenem versus a multi-drug regimen for treatment of endometritis after cesarean delivery., Methods: Retrospectively, patients with endometritis after cesarean delivery who were treated with ertapenem (group A) were compared to those treated with a combination regimen (group B). Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's Exact were used for statistical analysis with p value <0.05 considered statistically significant., Results: Sixty-three patients were included: 31 in group A and 32 in group B. Demographics and intrapartum characteristics did not differ. Number of administered doses (A: 3, B: 11.5 p < 0.0001), cost (A: $156.63, B: $54.48 p < 0.0001) and nursing time in minutes (A: 6.6, B: 25.3 p < 0.0001) were different between both groups. Wound complications were higher in group A, occurring in 7 patients compared to 1 patient in group B (p = 0.024)., Conclusion: Although time and number of administered doses were less in group A, given the high wound complication rate in patients treated with ertapenem, this drug may not be appropriate for all patients with endometritis after CD.

Aim: The study presents the results of the analysis of antibiotic consumption and its direct costs in selected neonatal units., Material and Methods: Data were collected retrospectively (the year 2007) in five hospitals, during the pilot phase of the Polish Neonatal Network . Antibiotic consumption was assessed using the Defined Daily Dose (DDD). The costs were assessed as the costs of purchase of one DDD., Results: The study included 11 922 children hospitalized in the period from 1.01 to 31.12.2007. In this group, 731 infants have birth weight < 1500 grams (from 2.2% to 64.2% in individual units, median--7.3%). The mean consumption of antibacterial drugs was 48.52 DDD/1 000 person-days (P-D) of stay among the entire study population (median--42,52), and varied from 23.13 to 85.82 DDD/1,000 P-D. However, this difference has not been statistically significant. The most commonly used group of antibiotics were beta-lactams--in four out of five units the percentage of its usage ranged from 48.71% to 74.67%. Next group were aminoglicosides--in one unit its usage reached 56.97% and in other ranged from 5.01% to 22.53%. Glycopeptides and macrolides were also used in every unit of the studied group. The usage of glycopeptides ranged from 1.7% to 10.81% and of macrolides from 1.32% to 15.71%. Different kinds of antibiotics were used occasionally. The differences of costs of purchase of one DDD between hospitals were greater and varied from 17,64 PLN/ DDD to 84,58 PLN/ DDD (average costs). A considerable range of costs index values was also noted for different groups of antibiotics. The costs of purchase of one DDD of beta-lactams varied from 19.54 PLN/ DDD to 68.35 PLN/ DDD; for aminoglicosides the cost varied from 4.61 PLN/ DDD to 122.9 PLN/ DDD, for glycopeptides--from 31.40 PLN/ DDD to 283.13 PLN/ DDD and in case of macrolides: from 12.05 PLN/ DDD to 90.77 PLN/ DDD. This differentiation of the cost of purchasing a single defined daily dose, taking into account the specific groups of antibiotics, did not have the characteristics of statistical significance., Conclusions: As expected, the antibiotic regimens in the studied wards were similar. This is due to a homogeneous population of hospitalized patients. However, the differences of costs of purchase of antibiotics observed in the study, indicate the considerable variety of the treatment patterns in Polish neonatology units and the need to develop and implement recommendations of effective pharmacotherapy for patients in intensive neonatal care units and the implementation of a unified model of infections surveillance.

Clinic-economic analysis of antibacterial therapy of an acute peritonitis was conducted, using the method of modeling with "the tree of expanses" building. Economic advantages of ertapenem application as a start therapy of an acute peritonitis were proved.

Clinical and economic investigation of various antibiotics use in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection (CUTI) was performed under the Russian economic environment. The drugs of comparison were ertapenem, ceftriaxone and levofloxacin. Direct costs and their structure were shown, and the cost efficiency was calculated. Alternative analysis and one-side susceptibility analysis were performed. In complicated urinary tract infections when the major pathogens were Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirabilis it was clinically and economically reasonable to start the treatment with ceftriaxone or ertapenem, while levofloxacin could be an alternative strategy. When the effects of the acquired resistance on the treatment effectiveness were evaluated (SIS model) it was shown that the pathogens susceptibility to ertapenem was preserved for a significantly longer time than that to ceftriaxone or levofloxacin (60 months). Such a parameter may serve as an additional evidence of the reasonable use of ertapenem as the starting treatment of CUTI.

Respiratory diseases account for approximately 10% of all hospital admissions in the United States. Pneumonia constitutes 35% of these cases, with an average length of stay (LOS) of 5.1 days. It is estimated that $8.4 billion to $10 billion of all annual US hospital expenditures are attributable to community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). As such, medical decisions, including empiric antibiotic choice, potentially exert an impact on hospital LOS and associated costs. In this review, we focus on the empiric antibiotic choices and associated costs of treatment for hospitalized patients with CAP, focusing on the use of fluoroquinolone therapy as recommended by the CAP guidelines., (Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of community-acquired complicated intraabdominal infections accounting for development of antibiotic resistance in the Dutch setting., Methods: A decision tree was developed to estimate cost-effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam at different time points after introduction of treatment. Development of resistance was incorporated using a compartment model. Resistance was a function of the eradication rate of pathogens and antibiotic prescription. Model outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), direct costs and cost per QALY saved. Microbiological eradication rate, clinical success, and costs were derived from literature. The analyses included pathogens with intrinsic or acquired resistance., Results: The model suggested overall savings of euro355 (95% uncertainty interval euro480; euro1205) per patient when abdominal infections are treated with ertapenem instead of piperacillin/tazobactam. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found a 94% probability of the incremental cost per QALY saved being within the generally accepted threshold for cost-effectiveness (euro20,000). After 5 years, it is expected that antibiotic resistance with piperacillin/tazobactam has increased with a greater rate compared to ertapenem, and cost-savings with ertapenem are expected to increase to euro672 (euro-232; euro1617). Ertapenem will, in addition, result in greater success rates and in QALY savings (0.17; 0.07-0.30). Alternative scenarios, with lower levels of initial resistance confirm the cost savings with ertapenem., Conclusion: Given the underlying assumptions and data used, this evaluation demonstrated that ertapenem is a cost saving and possibly an economically dominant therapy over piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of community-acquired intraabdominal infections in The Netherlands.

Background and Objective: Increased antibacterial use is associated with a greater likelihood of reduced effectiveness as a result of resistance development in the future. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of diabetic foot infections (DFIs) from the UK NHS perspective, accounting for the development of antibacterial resistance over time., Methods: A decision-tree model was developed to estimate the cost effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam at different timepoints in the 36 months following introduction of treatment. Development of antibacterial resistance was incorporated in the analysis using a previously published compartment (susceptible-infected-susceptible) model. The development of resistance was a function of the clearance rate of pathogens and the size of the proportion of the population prescribed the antibacterial. The microbiological clearance rate and clinical success rates were assumed to be related and were obtained from the SIDESTEP study. These data included resistant pathogens (either acquired or intrinsic resistance) such as Enterobacteriaceae, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Model outcomes over time included lifetime QALYs, direct medical costs (year 2006 values) and cost per QALY saved. Clinical efficacy of second-line treatment, direct medical costs and utilities were derived from other existing studies. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to estimate the uncertainty of model outcomes. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5% per annum., Results: The model suggested savings of pound407 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] -337, 1501) per patient when DFIs were treated with ertapenem instead of piperacillin/tazobactam after 1 month's treatment. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested a 91% probability of the incremental cost per QALY saved being within a threshold for cost effectiveness of pound20,000. After 3 years it is expected that the antibacterial resistance profile with piperacillin/tazobactam would increase at a greater rate than with ertapenem. As a result, the cost savings with ertapenem are expected to increase to pound3465 (95% UI 2502, 4564), and ertapenem will additionally result in greater clinical success rates and lifetime QALY savings (1.16; 95% UI 0.46, 2.06)., Conclusion: Ertapenem appears to be a cost-saving and possibly an economically dominant therapy over piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of patients with DFIs from the UK NHS perspective.

Background and Purpose: The costs of treating surgical site infections can be considerable. There is a cost associated with the prophylactic use of antibiotics; however, the use of prophylactic agents may reduce infection rates and lengths of stay, thus offsetting the overall treatment cost and potentially generating cost savings to hospitals. This project was intended to determine the potential cost impact of using ertapenem 1 g vs. cefotetan 2 g as prophylaxis for elective colorectal surgery., Methods: Cost analysis using efficacy data from the PREVENT clinical trial and drug acquisition and total hospital costs in 2005 dollars from Premier's Perspective Comparative Database in patients > or = 18 year of age, evaluable at four weeks after elective surgery of the colon or rectum and prophylactic treatment with ertapenem (n = 338) or cefotetan (n = 334). The primary outcome measures were the rate of prophylactic drug failure and the difference between the ertapenem and cefotetan groups in costs related to and total hospital stay. Prophylactic failure was defined as a surgical site infection, unexplained antibiotic use, or anastomotic leak., Results: Prophylactic failure occurred in 28.1% of the patients receiving ertapenem and 42.8% of those receiving cefotetan (p < 0.05). The most common prophylactic failure was surgical site infection: 18.3% for ertapenem, 31.1% for cefotetan, difference (95% confidence interval) -13.0% (-19.5, -6.5%) (p < 0.05). The mean +/- standard deviation length of stay for all patients, including prophylactic successes and failures, was 7.6 +/- 6.6 days for ertapenem and 8.7 +/- 9.5 days for cefotetan. The mean per-patient cost of prophylactic drugs and hospital room and board was $15,245 with ertapenem and $17,428 cefotetan, a net difference of -$2,181., Conclusions: Ertapenem used in prophylaxis for elective colorectal operations results in a lower rate of surgical site infection and a shorter average length of stay than cefotetan. The calculated net difference in prophylactic antibiotic drug and hospital costs represents a saving of $2,181 per patient with ertapenem relative to cefotetan.

Background: Infections caused by multiply drug resistant organisms such as extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae are increasing. Carbapenems (imipenem and meropenem) are the antibiotics commonly used to treat these agents. There is limited clinical data regarding the efficacy of the newest carbapenem, ertapenem, against these organisms. Ertapenem susceptibility of ESBL-producing E. coli and K. pneumoniae clinical isolates were evaluated and compared to imipenem to determine if imipenem susceptibility could be used as a surrogate for ertapenem susceptibility., Methods: 100 ESBL isolates (n = 34 E. coli and n = 66 K. pneumoniae) collected from 2005-2006 clinical specimens at WRAMC were identified and tested for susceptibility by Vitek Legacy [bioMerieux, Durham, NC]. Ertapenem susceptibility was performed via epsilometer test (E-test) [AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden]., Results: 100% of ESBL isolates tested were susceptible to ertapenem. 100% of the same isolates were also susceptible to imipenem., Conclusion: These results, based on 100% susceptibility, suggest that ertapenem may be an alternative to other carbapenems for the treatment of infections caused by ESBL-producing E. coli and K. pneumoniae. Clinical outcomes studies are needed to determine if ertapenem is effective for the treatment of infection caused by these organisms. However, due to lack of resistant isolates, we are unable to conclude whether imipenem susceptibility accurately predicts ertapenem susceptibility.

Purpose: To evaluate potential cost savings, trial data were used to determine the clinical outcomes for i.v. ertapenem given once daily and i.v. piperacillin-tazobactam given every six hours daily in treating diabetic foot infections., Methods: A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was conducted on the drug-dosing data of the subset of patients enrolled in a recent double-blind randomized trial who were treated solely as inpatients and were clinically evaluable at fi nal assessment (n = 99). Cost per dose was calculated from (a) average hospital acquisition price per dose for ertapenem ($40.52) or piperacillin-tazobactam ($13.58), (b) average U.S. wages and benefits for labor, based on nine published time-and-motion studies of i.v. antibiotic preparation and administration ($3.10), and (c) consumable supplies, using a 40% discount off the manufacturer list price ($2.90). For each patient, the actual number of antibiotic doses given was multiplied by total cost per dose., Results: There were no significant differences between antibiotic groups with respect to patient demographics, percentage with a severe wound, and mean days of i.v. therapy. Compared with piperacillin-tazobactam, patients treated with ertapenem received significantly fewer mean doses (25.5 versus 7.5; p < 0.0001) and lower antibiotic-related costs ($502.76 versus $355.55, respectively; p < 0.001). The $147.21 difference between groups accounts for approximately 3% of total hospital Medicare reimbursements for these infections., Conclusion: A CMA of treatment of diabetic foot infections showed that, compared with piperacillin-tazobactam given four times daily i.v., ertapenem given once daily i.v. was associated with lower drug acquisition and supply costs and less time and labor devoted to preparation and administration of i.v. therapy.

Cephalosporins are chemically closely related to penicillins both work by inhibiting the cell wall synthesis of bacteria. The first generation cephalosporins entered the market in 1964. Second and third generation cephalosporins were subsequently developed that were more powerful than the original products. Fourth generation cephalosporins are now reaching the market. Each newer generation of cephalosporins has greater Gram-negative antimicrobial properties than the preceding generation. Conversely, the 'older' generations of cephalosporins have greater Gram-positive (Staphylococcus and Streptococcus) coverage than the 'newer' generations. Frequency of dosing decreases and palatability generally improve with increasing generations. The advent of fourth generation cephalosporins with the launch of cefepime extended the spectrum against Gram-positive organisms without a significant loss of activity towards Gram-negative bacteria. Its greater stability to beta-lactamases increases its efficacy against drug-resistant bacteria. In this review we present the current situation of this mature market. In addition, we present the current state of the technologies employed for the production of cephalosporins, focusing on the new and environmentally safer 'green' routes to the products. Starting with the fermentation and purification of CPC, enzymatic conversion in conjunction with aqueous chemistry will lead to some key intermediates such as 7-ACA, TDA and TTA, which then can be converted into the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), again applying biocatalytic technologies and aqueous chemistry. Examples for the costing of selected products are provided as well.

The beta-lactam antibiotics (penicillins and cephalosporins) are commonly prescribed for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. However, Streptococcus pneumoniae, the most common etiologic agent of community-acquired pneumonia, has become increasingly resistant to beta-lactams over the past decade. The results of several studies suggest that penicillins remain effective for streptococcal pneumonia when the infecting pathogen has a minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) /=4 microgram/mL, increased rates of mortality (for patients who survive their first 4 days of hospitalization) may occur. Currently, 3.5%-7.8% of S. pneumoniae clinical isolates have MICs that fall in this latter class, but these rates may rise in the future. The clinical relevance of in vitro resistance may be related to at least 3 factors: concordance of antimicrobial therapy, severity of illness, and virulence.

The primary care physician is faced with a bewildering array of new oral antimicrobials to treat common infections. These agents promise to be extremely effective as replacements for time-honored drugs, as prophylaxis, and for the treatment of infections previously requiring prolonged intravenous therapy. The overuse of the newer macrolides, quinolones, and beta-lactam beta-lactamase inhibitors may prove to be ecologically and economically costly. It is feared that the selective pressure from these broad spectrum agents may burden society with an even greater problem of multiply resistant community-acquired pathogens. The specific therapeutic and economic advantages and disadvantages of each class should be considered and the decision to employ these agents should be highly individualized.