Impact of systematic screening for AmpC-hyperproducing Enterobacterales intestinal carriage in intensive care unit patients.

Enterobacterales Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL-E) High-level expressed AmpC cephalosporinase-producing Enterobacterales (HLAC-E) Intensive care unit Intestinal carriage Respiratory sample Third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales (3GCR-E)

Journal

Annals of intensive care
ISSN: 2110-5820
Titre abrégé: Ann Intensive Care
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101562873

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
29 Oct 2020
Historique:
received: 10 05 2020
accepted: 03 10 2020
entrez: 29 10 2020
pubmed: 30 10 2020
medline: 30 10 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT) is a challenge for community-acquired, hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia, particularly in the context of the increasing occurrence of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales (3GCR-E), including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Enterobacterales (ESBL-E) and high-level expressed AmpC cephalosporinase-producing Enterobacterales (HLAC-E). To prevent the overuse of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapies, such as carbapenems, we assessed the performance of screening for intestinal carriage of HLAC-E in addition to ESBL-E to predict 3GCR-E (ESBL-E and/or HLAC-E) presence or absence in respiratory samples in ICU, and to evaluate its potential impact on carbapenem prescription. This monocentric retrospective observational study was performed in a surgical ICU during a 4-year period (January 2013-December 2016). Patients were included if they had a positive culture on a respiratory sample and a previous intestinal carriage screening performed by rectal swabbing within 21 days. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated for the screening for intestinal carriage of ESBL-E, HLAC-E and 3GCR-E (ESBL-E and/or HLAC-E) as predictor of their absence/presence in respiratory samples. Impact of HLAC-E and ESBL-E reporting on EAT was also studied. 765 respiratory samples, retrieved from 468 patients, were analyzed. ESBL-E prevalence was 23.8% in rectal swab and 4.4% in respiratory samples. HLAC-E prevalence was 9.0% in rectal swabs and 3.7% in respiratory samples. Overall, the 3GCR-E prevalence was 31.8% in rectal swabs and 7.7% in respiratory samples. NPVs were 98.8%, 98.0% and 96.6% for ESBL-E, HLAC-E and 3GCR-E, respectively. Over the study period, empirical antimicrobial therapy was initiated for 315 episodes of respiratory infections: 228/315 (72.4%) were associated with negative intestinal carriage screening for both HLAC-E and ESBL-E, of whom 28/228 (12.3%) were treated with carbapenems. Of 23/315 (7.3%) cases with screening for positive intestinal carriage with HLAC-E alone, 10/23 (43.5%) were treated with carbapenems. Systematic screening and reporting of HLAC-E in addition to ESBL-E in intestinal carriage screening could help to predict the absence of 3GCR-E in respiratory samples of severe surgical ICU patients. This could improve the appropriateness of EAT in ICU patients with HAP and may prevent the overuse of carbapenems.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT) is a challenge for community-acquired, hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia, particularly in the context of the increasing occurrence of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales (3GCR-E), including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Enterobacterales (ESBL-E) and high-level expressed AmpC cephalosporinase-producing Enterobacterales (HLAC-E). To prevent the overuse of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapies, such as carbapenems, we assessed the performance of screening for intestinal carriage of HLAC-E in addition to ESBL-E to predict 3GCR-E (ESBL-E and/or HLAC-E) presence or absence in respiratory samples in ICU, and to evaluate its potential impact on carbapenem prescription.
MATERIALS AND METHODS METHODS
This monocentric retrospective observational study was performed in a surgical ICU during a 4-year period (January 2013-December 2016). Patients were included if they had a positive culture on a respiratory sample and a previous intestinal carriage screening performed by rectal swabbing within 21 days. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated for the screening for intestinal carriage of ESBL-E, HLAC-E and 3GCR-E (ESBL-E and/or HLAC-E) as predictor of their absence/presence in respiratory samples. Impact of HLAC-E and ESBL-E reporting on EAT was also studied.
RESULTS RESULTS
765 respiratory samples, retrieved from 468 patients, were analyzed. ESBL-E prevalence was 23.8% in rectal swab and 4.4% in respiratory samples. HLAC-E prevalence was 9.0% in rectal swabs and 3.7% in respiratory samples. Overall, the 3GCR-E prevalence was 31.8% in rectal swabs and 7.7% in respiratory samples. NPVs were 98.8%, 98.0% and 96.6% for ESBL-E, HLAC-E and 3GCR-E, respectively. Over the study period, empirical antimicrobial therapy was initiated for 315 episodes of respiratory infections: 228/315 (72.4%) were associated with negative intestinal carriage screening for both HLAC-E and ESBL-E, of whom 28/228 (12.3%) were treated with carbapenems. Of 23/315 (7.3%) cases with screening for positive intestinal carriage with HLAC-E alone, 10/23 (43.5%) were treated with carbapenems.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Systematic screening and reporting of HLAC-E in addition to ESBL-E in intestinal carriage screening could help to predict the absence of 3GCR-E in respiratory samples of severe surgical ICU patients. This could improve the appropriateness of EAT in ICU patients with HAP and may prevent the overuse of carbapenems.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33119840
doi: 10.1186/s13613-020-00754-9
pii: 10.1186/s13613-020-00754-9
pmc: PMC7594978
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

149

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Références

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Mar;57(3):1488-95
pubmed: 23318796
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Sep 1;63(5):e61-e111
pubmed: 27418577
Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Aug;13(8):665-71
pubmed: 23622939
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014 Apr;69(4):871-80
pubmed: 24265230
Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Jun;58(11):1554-63
pubmed: 24647022
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014 Jan;20 Suppl 1:1-55
pubmed: 24329732
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 May;21(5):468.e1-6
pubmed: 25656626
Ann Intensive Care. 2015 Dec;5(1):61
pubmed: 26261001
Intensive Care Med. 2008 Apr;34(4):675-82
pubmed: 18066522
Crit Care Med. 2017 Apr;45(4):705-714
pubmed: 28157141
Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Sep;57(6):781-8
pubmed: 23759352
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012 Jun;67(6):1525-36
pubmed: 22441577
Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Dec;13(12):1057-98
pubmed: 24252483
Respir Med. 2015 Jun;109(6):743-50
pubmed: 25956021
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 Apr;53(4):416-422
pubmed: 30537533
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014 Nov;20(11):O879-86
pubmed: 24807791
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 8;13(8):e0201688
pubmed: 30089150
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015 Dec 14;60(3):1883-7
pubmed: 26666938
Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Jun 15;64(12):1731-1736
pubmed: 28329088
Crit Care Med. 2016 Apr;44(4):699-706
pubmed: 26571186
Chest. 2002 Jul;122(1):262-8
pubmed: 12114368
J Med Microbiol. 2008 Mar;57(Pt 3):310-315
pubmed: 18287293
Ann Intensive Care. 2017 Dec;7(1):13
pubmed: 28155050
Crit Care. 2014 Jul 15;18(4):R152
pubmed: 25030270
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Dec;51(12):4012-7
pubmed: 24068012
Eur Respir J. 2017 Sep 10;50(3):
pubmed: 28890434
Crit Care Med. 2010 Sep;38(9):1773-85
pubmed: 20639750
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 May;54(5):1742-8
pubmed: 20160050

Auteurs

Elsa Manquat (E)

Service de Réanimation Chirurgicale Polyvalente, Département d'Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France. elsa.manquat@gmail.com.

Matthieu Le Dorze (M)

Service de Réanimation Chirurgicale Polyvalente, Département d'Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.
UMR-S942, Mascot, University of Paris, Paris, France.

Gauthier Pean De Ponfilly (G)

Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.

Hanaa Benmansour (H)

Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.

Rishma Amarsy (R)

Equipe Opérationnelle d'Hygiène, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.

Emmanuelle Cambau (E)

Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.
UMR1137, IAME, University of Paris, Paris, France.

Benjamin Soyer (B)

Service de Réanimation Chirurgicale Polyvalente, Département d'Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.

Benjamin Glenn Chousterman (BG)

Service de Réanimation Chirurgicale Polyvalente, Département d'Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.
UMR-S942, Mascot, University of Paris, Paris, France.

Hervé Jacquier (H)

Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, 2 Rue Ambroise Paré, 75475, Paris Cedex 10, France.
UMR1137, IAME, University of Paris, Paris, France.

Classifications MeSH