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]