y r a r b Bloodstream infections: oportunities for outcome i L improvement. e r u t Clinical evaluation and management. c e L e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Pilar Retamar Gentil Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Seville A patient in Emergency…. • 78th years-old man. • Coming from a LTCF. Cirrhotic (alcoholic). r ib L e r tu y r a • He was in the hospital 3 weeks ago because of a pneumonia treated with levofloxacin. Discharged with a urine catheter not removed because an acute urinary retention. Physical exam: n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © • 100/78 Fc 102. Tº 38,2. L e c e • Thorax exam and X-ray normal. • Abdomen: lightly painful. • Coloured urine. • Urine and blood culture taken. 14 hrs later….Micro lab: Gram-negative bacilli in the blood sample A question to begin: r ib y r a L Which of those is the main outcome e r u predictor in bacteremia? t c e L e 1. The age of the patient n i l n 2. The microorganism O 3. The source of the BSI D I r o 4. The severity of presentation M h t C u S a E y b © A question to begin: r ib y r a L Which of those is the main outcome e r u predictor in bacteremia? t c e L e 1. The age of the patient n i l n 2. The microorganism O 3. The source of the BSI D I r o 4. The severity of presentation M h t C u S a E y b © Clinical evaluation L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a Retamar AAC 2012 Clinical evaluation L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a THE HOST Age Underlying conditions (Inmunodeficency) Risk factors for MDR Retamar AAC 2012 Clinical evaluation L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a THE SOURCE Unknown source Source control Retamar AAC 2012 Clinical evaluation L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a THE MICROORGANISM Regarding: - source - acquisition - local resistances (Individual risk factors) Specific management Retamar AAC 2012 Clinical evaluation L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a SEVERITY OF ILLNESS Diagnosis Support treatment Retamar AAC 2012 Clinical evaluation L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a TREATMENT Drug of choice (Timeframe) Retamar AAC 2012 Clinical evaluation and management GRAM HOST Patient evaluation “in situ” (acquisition/ n i l n local resistances) O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © SOURCE c e L e EPIDEMIOLOGY SEVERITY OF ILLNES r ib L e r tu y r a MICROORGANISM Empiric AB THERAPY SOURCE CONTROL SEPSIS SUPPORT TREATMENT y r a 1. Evaluating the HOST: inmunocompromise • Age • Neutropenia • Cirrhosis • Haemodyalisis n i l n O • Solid cancer D or I • Diabetes mellitus M h t C u • COPD S a E • Chronic heart failure y b © • HIV (<200 CD4) L e r tu c e L e r ib Yoshikawa J Am Geriatr Soc 1996 Increased suceptibility Atypical presentation Severity INCREASE your GRADE of SUSPICION! 1. Evaluating the HOST: individual risk factors for MDR BSI r ib y r a L Which of those is not a risk factor of e r u t developing a ESBL-Enterobacteriaceae c e BSI? L e n i l n 1. Previous treatment with levofloxacin O 2. Recent history catheterization D of urinary I r o M 3. A health-care related acquisition h t C u S 4. A respiratory source a E y b © 1. Evaluating the HOST: individual risk factors for MDR BSI r ib y r a L Which of those is not a risk factor of e r u t developing a ESBL-Enterobacteriaceae c e BSI? L e n i l n 1. Previous treatment with levofloxacin O 2. Recent history catheterization D of urinary I r o M 3. A health-care related acquisition h t C u S 4. A respiratory source a E y b © A patient in Emergency…. • 78th years-old man. • Coming from a LTCF. Cirrhotic (alcoholic). r ib L e r tu y r a • He was in the hospital 3 weeks ago because of a pneumonia treated with levofloxacin. Discharged with a urine catheter not removed because an acute urinary retention. Physical exam: n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © • 100/78 Fc 102. Tº 38,2. L e • Thorax exam and X-ray normal. • Abdomen: lightly painful. • Coloured urine. • Urine and blood culture taken. c e Predictive models for infection due to ESBL-producers on admission y r a L e r ib Italian model r tu Duke model 2 3 3 2 3 4 Recent history of urinary catheterization 2 5 Charlson score ≥4 2 - 2 - - 2 Italian Model Duke model Sensitivity ≥95% ≥94% Specificity ≤47% ≤65% Sensitivity ≤50% ≤ 58% Specificity ≥96% ≥95% Recent beta-lactams of fluoroquinolones Previous hospitalization L e Transfer from another healthcare facility n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Age ≥70 years c e Immunosupression Tumbarello AAC 2011 Johnson ICHE 2013 Score 3 Score 8 1. Evaluating the HOST: individual risk factors for MDR BSI r ib L e r tu y r a MRSA: HA/HCR (haemodyalisis/LTCF), previous c e colonisation/infection, local endemia, SouthAmerica/USA L e n i l n ESBL: recent beta-lactams of fluoroquinolones, O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © HA/HCR (haemodyalisis/LTCF), urinary catheterization, Charlson score ≥4, age ≥70 years CR, XR_GNF: recent carbapenems, ICU, endemic areas AzoleR: previous colonisation, previous azole treatment 2. Evaluating the SOURCE y r a r ib L e Clinical symptoms: WATCH! HEAR! TOUCH! r tu Xray, CT, MNR… L e c e Staphylococci: Device-related infections n i l n Streptococci: LTRI, skin Enterococci: Abdominal / Uro tracts O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Gram-negative bacilli: Digestive tract, urinary tract Polymicrobial: Abdominal / Gine tracts More specific… Salmonella: Vascular/aneurysmal infection S. bovis isolated: GI malignancy? 2. Evaluating the SOURCE r tu L e r ib y r a With what frecuency a patient would present bacteremia of unknown source? 1. 5-10% 2. 15-30% n i l n L e O D I r 3. 30-40% o M h t 4. >40% C u S a E y b © c e 2. Evaluating the SOURCE r tu L e r ib y r a With what frecuency a patient would present bacteremia of unknown source? 1. 5-10% 2. 15-30% n i l n L e O D I r 3. 30-40% o M h t 4. >40% C u S a E y b © c e 2. Evaluating the SOURCE L e c e n i l n O D I r The unknown SOURCE o M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a Rguez-Baño CMI 2010 - Devices: catheter related, prostesis. - Atypical symptoms in inmunocompromised patients: frequent sources. - Low symptomatic sources: Endocarditis/Osteomyelitis/IAI abcesses. 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: acquisition y r a L e r ib Which of these is not a criteria for a health-care associated bacteremia? L e c e r tu n i l 2. Receiving chemotherapy in the outpatient clinic n O the hospital 3 days before 3. A discharge from D I r 4. Being haemodialysed o M h t C u S a E y b © 1. Coming from a LTCF 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: acquisition y r a L e r ib Which of these is not a criteria for a health-care associated bacteremia? L e c e r tu n i l 2. Receiving chemotherapy in the outpatient clinic n 3. A discharge O from the hospital 3 days before D I r 4. Being haemodialysed o M h t C u S a E y b © 1. Coming from a LTCF 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: acquisition L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a Rguez-Baño Expert Review 2010 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: acquisition L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a •iv therapy or specialist nursing care at home •haemodialysis in the 30 d before •hospitalization >2 d in a hospital in 1 yr before •resident in a LTCF Fowler A Int Med 2002 Rguez-Baño Expert Review 2010 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: acquisition L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a Rguez-Baño Expert Review 2010 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: local resistance patterns Pseudomonas Aeruginosa R a carbapenemas L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/activities/surveillance/EARS-Net 3. Evaluating the MICROORGANISM: local resistance patterns L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a ABSw team. HUV Macarena Seville y r a 4. Evaluating the SEVERITY OF ILLNESS: L e r ib Which of this is a criteria of severe sepsis? n i l 2. Cirrhosis MELD>10 n Omg/dL 3. Glycemia>120 D I 4. CR-P >10 UI/L or M h t C u S a E y b © L e 1. Pulse rate>90 bpm c e r tu y r a 4. Evaluating the SEVERITY OF ILLNESS: L e r ib Which of this is a criteria of severe sepsis? n i l 2. Cirrhosis MELD>10 n Omg/dL 3. Glycemia>120 D I 4. CR-P >10 UI/L or M h t C u S a E y b © L e 1. Pulse rate>90 bpm c e r tu y r a 4. Evaluating the SEVERITY OF ILLNESS: Review the chart data for the previous 48 h Active evaluation of the patient in situ L e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © L e r tu c e r ib Asymptomatic? Transient BSI Intermittent BSI Source controlled (CVC) Contamination? Lever BMJ 2007 Dellinger Crit Care Med 2013 BSI MANAGEMENT c e r ib L e r tu y r a Broad spectrum AB/combination → De-escalation→ Duration HOST MICRO SOURCE SEVERITY n i l n L e O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Time Survive → symptoms control → avoid resistances and toxicity Adapted from JR Paño y r Day 0: TREATMENT: Support treatment a r b i L e r u t c e L e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Dellinger Crit Care Med 2013 Day 0:TREATMENT: Ab_Gram Staim r ib L e r tu y r a Stretococci: ceftriaxone, ampiciline (if enterecocci) MSSA: cloxacillin or cefazolin (if haemodyalisis) plus Risk MRSA: dapto, vanco, linezolid CN: vanco L e c e n i l n Amoxi-CA, 1er or 2ond Cephalosp, Fluorquin If Pseudomonas risk: pip/taz, meropenem, amikacin If ESBL risk: carbapenem If GI tract: add metronidazol O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Echinocandin Azole y r Day 0:TREATMENT: Broad spectrum a Ab? r b i L e r u t c e L e n ECOLOGIC IMPACT? i l n O D or I M h t C u Coffee for everybody? S a E y b © What about… COSTS? Day 0:TREATMENT: Broad spectrum Ab? ry Importance of coverage Low risk Severe presentation/condition Source, virulent pathogen Risk or resistance a r ib L e r tu c e L e n i l n O r High risk ID o M h t C u S a E y b © Importance of ecology and cost Broad spectrum de-escalate Day 0:TREATMENT: Broad spectrum Ab? ry Importance of coverage Low risk Low severity Low risk for resistance a r ib L e r tu c e L e n i l n O r High risk ID o M h t C u S a E y b © Importance of ecology and cost Narrow spectrum revise y r Day 0: TREATMENT: Source controla r b i L e r u t c e L e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Marshall Crit Care Clin 2009 Day 3: Reevaluate 1. Consider definitive therapy….. c e L e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a http://www.hospital-macarena.com/antibioterapia 2. Consider switching to oral therapy 3. Plan/give advice about total duration http://www.hospital-macarena.com/antibioterapia MANAGEMENT regarding the organism S. aureus bacteremia r ib y r a L Which of these is not considerea quality r u markers in S. aureus BSI management? t c e L 1. Follow-up blood culture e n 2. Echocardiography li n Otherapy with levofloxacin at 3º day of 3. Switching to oral therapy ID r o M h 4. Vancomycin dosing t C u S a E y b © MANAGEMENT regarding the organism S. aureus bacteremia r ib y r a L Which of these is not considerea quality r u markers in S. aureus BSI management? t c e L 1. Follow-up blood culture e n 2. Echocardiography li n O therapy with levofloxacin at 3º 3. Switching to oral D or day of therapy I M h 4. Vancomycin dosing t C u S a E y b © MANAGEMENT regarding the organism S. aureus bacteremia L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a Ecocardiography always if: Primary or commnunity-acquired bacteremia Presence of intracardiac medical devices Persistent bacteremia (> 72 h) Short-course of antimicrobial therapy (all cases?) Twaites LID 2011 López-Cortés CID 2013 MANAGEMENT regarding the organism Candidemia IDSA guidelines 2009_ Pappas CID 2009 Candidemia in Nonneutropenic Patients c e r ib L e r tu y r a • Echinocandin for patients with moderately severe to severe illness (A-III). L e •Fluconazole for patients who are less critically ill (A-III). n i l n •Transition from an echinocandin to fluconazole is recommended for patients who have isolates that are likely to be susceptible to fluconazole (e.g.,Candida albicans) and who are clinically stable (A-II). O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © ESCMID guidelines_CMI 2012 Duration of treatment: 14 days after clearance of Candida from the blood IDSA (AIII) and ESCMID (BII): Removal of central lines: IDSA (AII) and ESCMID (AII): strongly recommended. If not possible (ESCMID, AII): lock therapy with amphothericin B in addition to systemic therapy. MANAGEMENT regarding the organism MDR gram negatives: PK/PD strategies y r a r b Different dosing regimens of meropenem i L e r u t c e L e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Population pharmacokinetic analysis Montecarlo simulation MIC ≤4 T>MIC=100% MIC≤8 T>MIC>80% Daikos el al. CMI 2011 Conclusions: • y r a L e r ib Bacteremia outcome depends on the underlying conditions of the host, the etiology, the source, the severity of presentation and the treatment adequacy. L e c e r tu • A careful and skilled clinical evaluation (IN SITU!!!) should be performed in all BSI episodes. • An early support treatment, a source control and the most appropriate antibiotic should be initiate considering the previous evaluation (host risk factors, epidemiology, source and severity). • When available… call the Infectious Diseases colleague. • If possible….stablish a Bacteremia Program in your hospital. n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © Thanks for your attention! L e c e n i l n O D or I M h t C u S a E y b © r ib L e r tu y r a Welcome to ESGBIS Business meeting Mon 13.15 Room 125 [email protected]
© Copyright 2024