Advertisement

Critical Care

, 9:459 | Cite as

Bench-to-bedside review: Antimicrobial utilization strategies aimed at preventing the emergence of bacterial resistance in the intensive care unit

  • Marin H Kollef
Review

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance has emerged as one of the most important issues complicating the management of critically ill patients with infection. This is largely due to the increasing presence of pathogenic microorganisms with resistance to existing antimicrobial agents resulting in the administration of inappropriate treatment. Effective strategies for the prevention of antimicrobial resistance within intensive care units are available and should be aggressively implemented. The importance of preventing antimicrobial resistance is magnified by the limited availability of new antimicrobial drug classes for the foreseeable future.

Keywords

Antibiotic Resistance Antimicrobial Resistance Intensive Care Unit Setting Cefpirome Infection Control Practice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Abbreviations

ICU

intensive care unit.

Introduction

Antimicrobial resistance has emerged as an important variable influencing patient mortality and overall resource utilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting [1, 2, 3]. ICUs worldwide are faced with increasingly rapid emergence and spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Both antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacilli and Gram-positive bacteria are reported as important causes of hospital-acquired infections [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]. In many circumstances, particularly with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, with vancomycin-resistant Entero-coccus faecium, and with Gram-negative bacteria producing extended spectrum beta-lactamases with resistance to multiple other antibiotics, few antimicrobial agents remain for effective treatment [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]. ICUs are an important area for the emergence of antimicrobial resistance due to the frequent use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, due to the crowding of patients with high levels of disease acuity within relatively small specialized areas, due to reductions in nursing staff and other support staff because of economic pressures that increase the likelihood of person-to-person transmission of microorganisms, and due to the presence of more chronically and acutely ill patients who require prolonged hospitalization and often harbor antibiotic-resistant bacteria [2, 20, 21].

Many strategies have been advocated to prevent the emergence of antibiotic resistance in the ICU setting [22]. These strategies also have application outside ICUs and in non-bacterial pathogens. It is important to note that these interventions attempt to balance the somewhat competing goals of providing appropriate antimicrobial treatment to critically ill patients while avoiding the unnecessary administration of antibiotics. This review will describe antimicrobial utilization strategies aimed at preventing the emergence of resistance in the ICU setting.

Why does antimicrobial resistance develop?

Antimicrobial use drives the emergence of resistance. Strategies aimed at limiting or modifying the administration of antimicrobial agents therefore have the greatest likelihood of preventing resistance to these agents [21]. A number of investigators have demonstrated a close association between the prior use of antibiotics and the emergence of subsequent antibiotic resistance both in Gram-negative bacteria and in Gram-positive bacteria [23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34]. Other factors promoting antimicrobial resistance include prolonged hospitalization, the presence of invasive devices such as endotracheal tubes and intravascular catheters (possibly due to the formation of biofilms on the surfaces of these devices), residence in long-term treatment facilities, and inadequate infection control practices [21]. The prolonged administration of antimicrobial regimens, however, especially with a single or predominant antibiotic or drug class, appears to be the most important factor promoting the emergence of antibiotic resistance that is potentially amenable to intervention [31, 35, 36].

Implications of increasing bacterial antibiotic resistance

Previous investigations have shown that antimicrobial regimens lacking activity against identified microorganisms causing serious infections (e.g. hospital-acquired pneumonia, bloodstream infections) are associated with greater hospital mortality [37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46]. The same finding has more recently been demonstrated for patients with severe sepsis [47, 48, 49, 50]. Unfortunately, changing antimicrobial therapy to an appropriate regimen after susceptibility data become available has not been demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes [39, 43, 45].

These studies suggest that clinicians should strive to administer appropriate initial antimicrobial treatment to patients with serious infections, especially those infected with potentially high-risk antibiotic-resistant pathogens (Pseudo-monas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter species, methicillin-resistant S. aureus), in order to minimize the risk of mortality. In addition to selecting an appropriate initial antimicrobial regimen, optimal dosing, interval of drug administration, and duration of treatment are required for antimicrobial efficacy, limiting toxicity, and to prevent the emergence of bacterial resistance [21].

Antimicrobial resistance prevention strategies

The following section describes the most common employed antimicrobial modification strategies aimed at limiting antibiotic resistance. This is provided to place antimicrobial cycling in the proper context of these other interventions. It is assumed that whenever antibiotics are prescribed they will be used in doses and administered at time intervals aimed at optimizing their pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties [21].

Formal protocols and guidelines

Antibiotic practice guidelines or protocols have emerged as a potentially effective means of both avoiding unnecessary antibiotic administration and increasing the effectiveness of prescribed antibiotics. Automated antimicrobial utilization guidelines have been successfully employed to identify and minimize the occurrence of adverse drug effects due to antibiotic administration and to improve antibiotic selection [51, 52]. Their use has also been associated with stable antibiotic susceptibility patterns for both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, possibly as a result of promoting antimicrobial heterogeneity and specific endpoints for antibiotic discontinuation [53, 54].

Antimicrobial guidelines have also been employed to reduce the overall use of antibiotics and to limit the use of inappropriate antimicrobial treatment, both of which could impact upon the development of antibiotic resistance [40, 55, 56]. One way in which these guidelines limit the unnecessary use of antimicrobial agents is by recommending that therapy be modified when initial empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics are prescribed and the culture results reveal that more narrow-spectrum antibiotics can be employed [56].

Hospital formulary restrictions

Restricted use of specific antibiotics or antibiotic classes from the hospital formulary has been employed as a strategy to reduce the occurrence of antibiotic resistance and antimicrobial costs [21]. Such an approach has been shown to achieve reductions in pharmacy expenses and in adverse drug reactions from the restricted drugs [57]. Restricted use of specific antibiotics has generally been applied to those drugs with a broad spectrum of action (e.g. carbapenems), rapid emergence of antibiotic resistance (e.g. cephalo-sporins), and readily identified toxicity (e.g. aminoglycosides). To date it has been difficult to demonstrate that restricted hospital formularies are effective in curbing the overall emergence of antibiotic resistance among bacterial species. This may be due in large part to methodologic problems. However, their use has been successful in specific outbreaks of infection with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, particularly in conjunction with infection control practices and antibiotic educational activities [31, 58, 59]. It is important to note that this type of intervention will only be successfully implemented if such outbreaks are recognized by monitoring patient surveillance cultures and clinical cultures.

Use of narrow-spectrum antibiotics

Another proposed strategy to curtail the development of antimicrobial resistance, in addition to the judicious overall use of antibiotics, is to use drugs with a narrow antimicrobial spectrum. Several investigations suggest that infections such as community-acquired pneumonia can usually be successfully treated with narrow-spectrum antibiotic agents, especially if the infections are not life-threatening [60, 61]. Similarly, the avoidance of broad-spectrum antibiotics (e.g. cephalosporins) and the reintroduction of narrow-spectrum agents (penicillin, trimethoprim, gentamicin) along with infection control practices have been successful in reducing the occurrence of Clostridium difficile infections [62]. Unfortunately, ICU patients often have already received prior antimicrobial treatment, making it more probable that they will be infected with an antibiotic-resistant pathogen [34]. Initial empiric treatment with broad-spectrum agents is therefore often necessary in order to avoid inappropriate treatment until culture results become available [41, 42].

Combination antibiotic therapy

The use of combination antimicrobial therapy has been proposed as a strategy to reduce the emergence of bacterial resistance, as has been employed for Mycobacterium tuberculosis [63]. Unfortunately, no convincing data exist to validate this hypothesis for nosocomial infections. Several recent meta-analyses recommend the use of monotherapy with a beta-lactam antibiotic for the definitive treatment of neutropenic fever and severe sepsis, once antimicrobial susceptibilities are known [64, 65]. Additionally, there is no definitive evidence that the emergence of antibiotic resistance is reduced by the use of combination antimicrobial therapy. However, empiric combination therapy directed against high-risk pathogens such as P. aeruginosa should be encouraged until the results of antimicrobial susceptibility become available. Such an approach to empiric treatment can increase the likelihood of providing appropriate initial antimicrobial therapy with improved outcomes [46, 66].

Shorter courses of antibiotic treatment

Prolonged administration of antibiotics in ICU patients has been shown to be an important risk factor for the emergence of colonization and infection with antibiotic-resistant bacteria [36, 40]. Recent attempts have therefore been made to reduce the duration of antibiotic treatment for specific bacterial infections. Several clinical trials have found that 7–8 days of antibiotic treatment is acceptable for most non-bacteremic patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia [35, 40, 56]. Similarly, shorter courses of antibiotic treatment have been successfully employed in patients at low-risk for ventilator-associated pneumonia [67], in patients with pyelonephritis [68], and in patients with community-acquired pneumonia [69].

Antibiotic heterogeneity

The concept of antibiotic heterogeneity has been suggested as a potential strategy for reducing the emergence of antimicrobial resistance [70]. In theory, a class of antibiotics or a specific antibiotic drug is withdrawn from use for a defined time period and reintroduced at a later point in time in an attempt to limit bacterial resistance to the cycled antimicrobial agents. This offers the potential for antibiotic classes to be used that possess greater overall activity against the predominant ICU pathogens, resulting in more effective treatment of nosocomial infections. Antibiotic cycling is one method of achieving antimicrobial heterogeneity. Other methods include mixing of antibiotic classes, scheduled changes of antibiotic classes, and the rotation of antibiotics.

Gruson and colleagues performed one of the first cycling studies in an ICU setting [71]. Their program consisted of restricting the use of ceftazidime and ciprofloxacin along with cycling other antibiotics directed against Gram-negative bacteria. Antibiotic consumption and resistance profiles were monitored on a monthly basis to help determine the antibiotics to be used during each subsequent time cycle. The occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia significantly decreased during the 2-year intervention period compared with the 2-year control period when cycling and restriction of quinolones and cephalosporins were not applied. The reduction in ventilator-associated pneumonia was primarily attributable to a decreased incidence of infection with antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Indeed, it appeared that part of the explanation for these findings was the greater administration of effective antibiotic regimens during the cycling periods, as also demonstrated in previous investigations [72, 73].

The results of Gruson and colleagues were confirmed by Raymond and colleagues, who conducted a 2-year before-after study in a surgical ICU [74]. Specific antibiotic rotation schedules were developed for pneumonia and for intra-abdominal infections, respectively. Outcome analysis revealed significant reductions in the incidence of Gram-positive bacterial infections, of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections, and of mortality associated with infection. This same group of investigators subsequently demonstrated that this strategy of antibiotic rotation in the ICU setting was associated with a reduction in infection-related morbidity (hospital-acquired and antibiotic-resistant hospital-acquired infection rates) on non-ICU wards to which patients were transferred [75]. Unfortunately, these earlier studies of antibiotic rotation suffered from methodological limitations, including lack of concurrent control groups and changes in infection control practices during the cycling interventions.

van Loon and colleagues cycled two different antibiotic classes (fluoroquinolone and beta-lactam) in a surgical ICU during four 4-month cycling periods, obtaining respiratory aspirates and rectal swab cultures [76]. In all, 388 patients were evaluated along with 2520 cultures. There was good adherence to the antibiotic protocol, but overall antibiotic use increased by 24%. Acquisition of resistant bacteria was highest during use of levofloxacin and piperacillin/ tazobactam. The potential for selection of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria during periods of homogeneous exposure increased from cefpirome to piperacillin/tazobactam to levofloxacin.

Warren and colleagues similarly cycled four classes of antibiotics with Gram-negative activity over 3-month to 4-month intervals for 24 months, following a 5-month baseline period of uncontrolled-antibiotic use [77]. Acquisition of resistance was evaluated using cultures of Entero-bacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa obtained from rectal swabs on admission, weekly in the ICU, and at discharge. Among study patients who were not already cultured with a resistant organism, the rate of acquisition of enteric colonization with a bacteria resistant to any of the target drugs remained stable during the cycling period – P. aeruginosa: relative rate, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.47–2.16; and Enterobacteriaceae: relative rate, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.80–3.34. However, the proportion of P. aeruginosa resistant to the target drugs increased hospital-wide during the cycling period but decreased in the ICU undergoing antimicrobial cycling [77].

Optimizing pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles

Antibiotic concentrations that are sublethal can promote the emergence of resistant pathogens. Optimization of antibiotic regimens on the basis of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles could play a role in the reduction of antibiotic resistance.

The duration of time that the serum drug concentration remains above the minimum inhibitory concentration of the antibiotic enhances the bacterial eradication with beta-lactams, carbapenems, monbactams, glycopeptides, and oxazolidinones. Frequent dosing, prolonged infusion times, or continuous infusions can increase the duration of time that the serum drug concentration remains above the minimum inhibitory concentration of the antibiotic, and can improve clinical and microbiological cure rates [78, 79, 80, 81].

In order to maximize the bactericidal effects of amino-glycosides, clinicians must optimize the maximum drug concentration to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio. A maximum drug concentration to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio ≥ 10:1 using once-daily aminoglycoside dosing (5–7 mg/kg) has been associated with preventing the emergence of resistant organisms [82, 83, 84].

The 24-h area under the antibiotic concentration curve to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio is correlated with fluoroquinolone efficacy and prevention of resistance development. A 24-h area under the antibiotic concentration curve to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio value >100 has been associated with a significant reduction in the risk of resistance development while on therapy [85, 86].

Summary

Clinicians working in the ICU setting should routinely employ antibiotic strategies aimed at limiting the emergence of resistance [21]. These strategies should focus on providing appropriate antibiotics to patients with infection, based on culture data and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, while using optimal dosing of antibiotics for the shortest duration of use that is clinically acceptable.

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Goldmann DA, Weinstein RA, Wenzel RP, Tablan OC, Duma RJ, Gaynes RP, Schlosser J, Martone WJ: Strategies to prevent and control the emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant microorganisms in hospitals. A challenge to hospital leadership. JAMA 1996, 275: 234-240. 10.1001/jama.275.3.234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carlet J, Ben Ali A, Chalfine A: Epidemiology and control of antibiotic resistance in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2004, 17: 309-316. 10.1097/01.qco.0000136927.29802.68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vincent JL, Bihari DJ, Suter PM, Bruining HA, White J, Nicolas-Chanoin MH, Wolff M, Spencer RC, Hemmer M: The prevalence of nosocomial infection in intensive care units in Europe: results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study; EPIC International Advisory Committee. JAMA 1995, 274: 639-644. 10.1001/jama.274.8.639CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waldvogel FA: New resistance in Staphylococcus aureus . N Engl J Med 1999, 340: 556-557. 10.1056/NEJM199902183400709CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hanberger H, Garcia-Rodriguez JA, Gobernado M, Goossens H, Nilsson LE, Struelens MJ: Antibiotic susceptibility among aerobic Gram-negative Bacilli in intensive care units in 5 European countries. JAMA 1999, 281: 67-71. 10.1001/jama.281.1.67CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Quinn JP: Clinical problems posed by multiresistant nonfer-menting gram-negative pathogens. Clin Infect Dis 1998, 27: S117-S124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones RN, Sader HS, Beach ML: Contemporary in vitro spectrum of activity summary for antimicrobial agents tested against 18569 strains non-fermentative Gram-negative bacilli isolated in the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1997–2001). Int J Antimicrob Agents 2003, 22: 551-556. 10.1016/S0924-8579(03)00245-0CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Livermore DM: Bacterial resistance: origins, epidemiology, and impact. Clin Infect Dis 2003, 36: S11-S23. 10.1086/344654CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H, Gerlach H, Calandra T, Cohen J, Gea-Banacloche J, Keh D, Marshall JC, Parker MM, et al.: Surviving Sepsis Campaign Management Guidelines Committee. Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 858-873. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000117317.18092.E4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shlaes DM, Gerding DN, John JF Jr, Craig WA, Bornstein DL, Duncan RA, Eckman MR, Farrer WE, Greene WH, Lorian V, et al.: Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and Infectious Diseases Society of America Joint Committee on the Prevention of Antimicrobial Resistance: Guidelines for the prevention of antimicrobial resistance in hospitals. Clin Infect Dis 1997, 25: 584-599.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neuhauser MM, Weinstein RA, Rydman R, Danziger LH, Karam G, Quinn JP: Antibiotic resistance among Gram-negative bacilli in US intensive care units: implications for fluoroquinolone use. JAMA 2003, 289: 885-888. 10.1001/jama.289.7.885CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Archibald L, Phillips L, Monnet D, McGowan JE Jr, Tenover F, Gaynes R: Antimicrobial resistance in isolates from inpatients and outpatients in the United States: increasing importance of the intensive care unit. Clin Infect Dis 1997, 24: 211-215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sieradzki K, Roberts RB, Haber SW, Tomasz A: The development of Vancomycin resistance in a patient with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. N Engl J Med 1999, 340: 517-523. 10.1056/NEJM199902183400704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith TL, Pearson ML, Wilcox KR, Cruz C, Lancaster MV, Robin-son-Dunn B, Tenover FC, Zervos MJ, Band JD, White E, et al.: Emergence of Vancomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus . N Engl J Med 1999, 340: 493-501. 10.1056/NEJM199902183400701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van Looveren M, Goossens H: Antimicrobial resistance of Acinetobacter spp . in Europe. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004, 10: 684-704. 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2004.00942.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Canton R, Coque TM, Baquero F: Multi-resistant Gram-negative bacilli: from epidemics to endemics. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2003, 16: 315-325.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Linden PK, Kusne S, Coley K, Fontes P, Kramer DJ, Paterson D: Use of parenteral colistin for the treatment of serious infection due to antimicrobial-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa . Clin Infect Dis 2003, 11: 154-160. 10.1086/379611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Livermore DM, Yuan M: Antibiotic resistance and production of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases amongst Klebsiella spp from intensive care units in Europe. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996, 38: 409-424.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cartolano GL, Cheron M, Benabid D, Leneveu M, Boisivon A: Association of Hospital Bacteriologists, Virologists and Hygiene Professionals. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides (GISA) in 63 French general hospitals. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004, 10: 448-451. 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2004.00830.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Haley RW, Bregman DA: The role of understaffing and overcrowding in recurrent outbreaks of staphylococcal infection in a neonatal special-care unit. J Infect Dis 1982, 145: 875-885.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kollef MH, Fraser VJ: Antibiotic resistance in the intensive care unit. Ann Intern Med 2001, 134: 298-314.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kollef MH, Micek ST: Strategies to prevent antimicrobial resistance in the ICU. Crit Care Med 2005, in press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fagon JY, Chastre J, Domart Y, Trouillet JL, Pierre J, Darne C, Gibert C: Nosocomial pneumonia in patients receiving continuous mechanical ventilation. Prospective analysis of 52 episodes with use of a protected specimen brush and quantitative culture technique. Am Rev Respir Dis 1989, 139: 877-884.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ortiz J, Vila MC, Soriano G, Minana J, Gana J, Mirelis B, Novella MT, Coll S, Sabat M, Andreu M, et al.: Infections caused by Escherichia coli resistant to norfloxacin in hospitalized cir-rhotic patients. Hepatology 1999, 29: 1064-1069. 10.1002/hep.510290406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kaplan SL, Mason EO Jr, Barson WJ, Wald ER, Arditi M, Tan TQ, Schutze GE, Bradley JS, Givner LB, Kim KS, et al.: Three-year multicenter surveillance of systemic pneumococcal infections in children. Pediatrics 1998, 102: 538-545. 10.1542/peds.102.3.538CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Edmond MB, Ober JF, Weinbaum DL, Pfaller MA, Hwang T, Sanford MD, Wenzel RP: Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium bacteremia: risk factors for infection. Clin Infect Dis 1995, 20: 1126-1133.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Husni RN, Goldstein LS, Arroliga AC, Hall GS, Fatica C, Stoller JK, Gordon SM: Risk factors for an outbreak of multi-drug-resistant Acinetobacter nosocomial pneumonia among intubed patients. Chest 1999, 115: 1378-1382. 10.1378/chest.115.5.1378CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rello J, Ausina V, Ricart M, Castella J, Prats G: Impact of previous antimicrobial therapy on the etiology and outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 1993, 104: 1230-1235.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kollef MH: Ventilator-associated pneumonia: a multivariate analysis. JAMA 1993, 270: 1965-1970. 10.1001/jama.270.16.1965CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kollef MH, Silver P, Murphy DM, Trovillion E: The effect of late-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia in determining patient mortality. Chest 1995, 108: 1655-1662.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rahal JJ, Urban C, Horn D, Freeman K, Segal-Maurer S, Maurer J, Mariano N, Marks S, Burns JM, Dominick D, et al.: Class restriction of cephalosporin use to control total cephalosporin resistance in nosocomial Klebsiella . JAMA 1998, 280: 1233-1237. 10.1001/jama.280.14.1233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Meyer KS, Urban C, Eagan JA, Berger BJ, Rahal JJ: Nosocomial outbreak of Klebsiella infection resistant to late-generation cephalosporins. Ann Intern Med 1993, 119: 353-358.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Urban C, Go E, Mariano N, Berger BJ, Avraham I, Rubin D, Rahal JJ: Effect of sulbactam on infections caused by imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter calcoaceticus biotype antratus. J Infect Dis 1993, 167: 448-451.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Trouillet JL, Chastre J, Vuagnat A, Joly-Guillou ML, Combaux D, Dombret MC, Gibert C: Ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by potentially drug-resistant bacteria. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998, 157: 531-539.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY, Chevret S, Thomas F, Wermert D, Clementi E, Gonzalez J, Jusserand D, Asfar P, et al.: Comparison of 15 vs. 8 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA 2003, 290: 2588-2598. 10.1001/jama.290.19.2588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dennesen PJ, van der Ven AJ, Kessels AG, Ramsay G, Bonten MJ: Resolution of infectious parameters after antimicrobial therapy in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001, 163: 1371-1375.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ibrahim EH, Sherman G, Ward S, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: The influence of inadequate antimicrobial treatment of bloodstream infections on patient outcomes in the ICU setting. Chest 2000, 118: 146-155. 10.1378/chest.118.1.146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Harbarth S, Ferriere K, Hugonnet S, Ricou B, Suter P, Pittet D: Epidemiology and prognostic determinants of bloodstream infections in surgical intensive care. Arch Surg 2002, 137: 1353-1359. 10.1001/archsurg.137.12.1353CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Alvarez-Lerma F: Modification of empiric antibiotic treatment in patients with pneumonia acquired in the intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 1996, 22: 387-394. 10.1007/BF01712153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ibrahim EH, Ward S, Sherman G, Schaiff R, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: Experience with a clinical guideline for the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med 2001, 29: 1109-1115. 10.1097/00003246-200106000-00003CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kollef MH: Inadequate antimicrobial treatment: an important determinant of outcome for hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis 2000, 31: S131-S138. 10.1086/314079CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kollef MH, Sherman G, Ward S, Prentice D, Schaiff R, Huey W, Fraser VJ: Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. Chest 1999, 115: 462-474. 10.1378/chest.115.2.462CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kollef MH, Ward S: The influence of mini-BAL cultures on patient outcomes: implications for the antibiotic management of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 1998, 113: 412-420.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rello J, Gallego M, Mariscal D, Sonora R, Valles J: The value of routine microbial investigation in ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997, 156: 196-200.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Luna CM, Vujacich P, Niederman MS, Vay C, Gherardi C, Matera J, Jolly EC: Impact of BAL data on the therapy and outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 1997, 111: 676-685.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Micek ST, Lloyd AE, Ritchie DJ, Reichley RM, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection: importance of appropriate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005, 49: 1306-1311. 10.1128/AAC.49.4.1306-1311.2005PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dhainaut JF, Laterre PF, LaRosa S, Levy H, Garber GE, Heiselman D, Kinasewitz GT, Light RB, Morris P, Schein R, et al.: The clinical evaluation committee in a large multicenter phase 3 trial of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in patients with severe sepsis (PROWESS): role, methodology, and results. Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 2291-2301. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000085089.88077.AFCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Harbarth S, Garbino JK, Pugin J, Romand JA, Lew D, Pittet D: Inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy and its effects on survival in a clinical trial of immunomodulating therapy for severe sepsis. Am J Med 2003, 115: 529-535. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.07.005CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Garnacho-Montero J, Garcia-Garmendia JL, Barrero-Almodovar A, Jimenez-Jimenez FJ, Perez-Paredes C, Ortiz-Leyba C: Impact of adequate empirical antibiotic therapy on the outcome of patients admitted to the intensive care unit with sepsis. Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 2742-2751. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000098031.24329.10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Micek ST, Isakow W, Shannon W, Kollef MH: Predictors of hospital mortality for patients with severe sepsis treated with Drotrecogin alfa (activated). Pharmacotherapy 2005, 25: 26-34. 10.1592/phco.25.1.26.55615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Classen DC, Pestotnik SL, Evans RS, Lloyd JF, Burke JP: Adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA 1997, 277: 301-306. 10.1001/jama.277.4.301CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Evans RS, Classen DC, Pestotnik SL, Lundsgaarde HP, Burke JP: Improving empiric antibiotic selection using computer decision support. Arch Intern Med 1994, 154: 878-884. 10.1001/archinte.154.8.878CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pestotnik SL, Classen DC, Evans RS, Burke JP: Implementing antibiotic practice guidelines through computer-assisted decision support: clinical and financial outcomes. Ann Intern Med 1996, 124: 884-890.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, Classen DC, Clemmer TP, Weaver LK, Orme JF Jr, Lloyd JF, Burke JP: A computer-assisted management program for antibiotics and other antiinfective agents. N Engl J Med 1998, 338: 232-238. 10.1056/NEJM199801223380406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bailey TC, Ritchie DJ, McMullin ST, Kahn M, Reichley RM, Casabar E, Shannon W, Dunagan WC: A randomized, prospective evaluation of an interventional program to discontinue intravenous antibiotics at two tertiary care teaching institutions. Pharmacotherapy 1997, 17: 277-281.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Micek ST, Ward S, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: A randomized controlled trial of an antibiotic discontinuation policy for clinically suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 2004, 125: 1791-1799. 10.1378/chest.125.5.1791CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    McGowan JE Jr, Gerding DN: Does antibiotic restriction prevent resistance? New Horizons 1996, 4: 370-376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Climo MW, Israel DS, Wong ES, Williams D, Coudron P, Markowitz SM: Hospital-wide restriction of clindamycin: effect on the incidence of Clostridium difficile -associated diarrhea and cost. Ann Intern Med 1998, 128: 989-995.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Quale J, Landman D, Atwood E, Kreiswirth B, Willey BM, Ditore V, Zaman M, Patel K, Saurina G, Huang W, et al.: Experience with a hospital-wide outbreak of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Am J Infect Control 1996, 24: 372-379. 10.1016/S0196-6553(96)90025-5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gleason PP, Kapoor WN, Stone RA, Lave JR, Obrosky DS, Schulz R, Singer DE, Coley CM, Marrie TJ, Fine MJ: Medical outcomes and antimicrobial costs with the use of the American Thoracic Society guidelines for outpatients with community-acquired pneumonia. JAMA 1997, 278: 32-39. 10.1001/jama.278.1.32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ailani RK, Agastya G, Ailani RK, Mukunda BN, Shekar R: Doxycycline is a cost-effective therapy for hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Arch Intern Med 1999, 159: 266-270. 10.1001/archinte.159.3.266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    McNulty C, Logan M, Donald IP, Ennis D, Taylor D, Baldwin RN, Bannerjee M, Cartwright KA: Successful control of Clostridium difficile infection in an elderly care unit through use of a restrictive antibiotic policy. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997, 40: 707-711. 10.1093/jac/40.5.707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wade JC: Antibiotic therapy for the granulocytopenic cancer patient: combination therapy vs. monotherapy. Rev Infect Dis 1989, 11: S1572-S1581.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Paul M, Benuri-Silbiger I, Soares-Weiser K, Leibovici L: Beta-lactam monotherapy versus beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination therapy for sepsis in immunocompetent patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. BMJ 2004, 328: 668. 10.1136/bmj.38028.520995.63PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Paul M, Soares-Weiser K, Leibovici L: Beta-lactam monotherapy versus beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination therapy for fever with neutropenia: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2003, 326: 1111. 10.1136/bmj.326.7399.1111PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Chamot E, Boffi El Amari E, Rohner P, Van Delden C: Effectiveness of combination antimicrobial therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003, 47: 2756-2764. 10.1128/AAC.47.9.2756-2764.2003PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Singh N, Rogers P, Atwood CW, Wagener MM, Yu VL: Short-course empiric antibiotic therapy for patients with pulmonary infiltrates in the intensive care unit. A proposed solution for indiscriminate antibiotic prescription. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000, 162: 505-511.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Talan DA, Stamm WE, Hooton TM, Moran GJ, Burke T, Iravani A, Reuning-Scherer J, Church DA: Comparison of ciprofloxacin (7 days) and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (14 days) for acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis pyelonephritis in women: a randomized trial. JAMA 2000, 283: 1583-1590. 10.1001/jama.283.12.1583CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Dunbar LM, Wunderink RG, Habib MP, Smith LG, Tennenberg AM, Khashab MM, Wiesinger BA, Xiang JX, Zadeikis N, Kahn JB: High-dose, short-course levofloxacin for community-acquired pneumonia: a new treatment paradigm. Clin Infect Dis 2003, 37: 752-760. 10.1086/377539CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Niederman MS: Is 'crop rotation' of antibiotics the solution to a "resistant" problem in the ICU? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997, 156: 1029-1031.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Gruson D, Hilbert G, Vargas F, Valentino R, Bebear C, Allery A, Bebear C, Gbikpi-Benissan G, Cardinaud JP: Rotation and restricted use of antibiotics in a medical intensive care unit: Impact on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000, 162: 837-843.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kollef MH, Vlasnik J, Sharpless L, Pasque C, Murphy D, Fraser V: Scheduled rotation of antibiotic classes. A strategy to decrease the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia due to antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997, 156: 1040-1048.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kollef MH, Ward S, Sherman G, Prentice D, Schaiff R, Huey W, Fraser V: Inadequate treatment of nosocomial infections is associated with certain empiric antibiotic choices. Crit Care Med 2000, 28: 3456-3464. 10.1097/00003246-200010000-00014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Raymond DP, Pelletier SJ, Crabtree TD, Evans HL, Pruett TL, Sawyer RG: Impact of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacilli infections on outcome in hospitalized patients. Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 1035-1041. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000060015.77443.31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hughes MG, Evans HL, Chong TW, Smith RL, Raymond DP, Pel-letier SJ, Pruett TL, Sawyer RG: Effect of an intensive care unit rotating empiric antibiotic schedule on the development of hospital-acquired infections on the non-intensive care unit ward. Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 53-60. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000104463.55423.EFCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    van Loon HJ, Vriens MR, Fluit AC, Troelstra A, van der Werken C, Verhoef J, Bonten MJ: Antibiotic rotation and development of gram-negative antibiotic resistance. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005, 171: 480-487. 10.1164/rccm.200401-070OCCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Warren DK, Hill HA, Merz LR, Kollef MH, Hayden MK, Fraser VJ, Fridkin SK: Cycling empirical antimicrobial agents to prevent emergence of antimicrobial-resistant Gram-negative bacteria among intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 2450-2456. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000147685.79487.28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Benko AS, Cappelletty DM, Kruse JA, Rybak MJ: Continuous infusion versus intermittent administration of ceftazidime in critically ill patients with suspected Gram-negative infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996, 40: 691-695.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Boselli E, Breilh D, Duflo F, Saux MC, Debon R, Chassard D, Allaouchiche B: Steady-state plasma and intrapulmonary concentrations of cefepime administered in continuous infusion in critically ill patients with severe pneumonia. Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 2102-2106. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000069734.38738.C8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Wysocki M, Delatour F, Faurisson F, Rauss A, Pean Y, Misset B, Thomas F, Timsit JF, Similowski T, Mentec H, et al.: Continuous versus intermittant infusion of vancomycin in severe Staphylococcal infections: prospective multicenter randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001, 45: 2460-2467. 10.1128/AAC.45.9.2460-2467.2001PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Lipman J, Wallis SC, Rickard C: Low plasma cefepime levels in critically ill septic patients: pharmacokinetic modeling indicates improved troughs with revised dosing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999, 43: 2559-2561.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Moore RD, Lietman PS, Smith CR: Clinical response to amino-glycoside therapy: the importance of peak concentration to minimal inhibitory concentration. J Infect Dis 1987, 155: 93-99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Blaser J, Stone BB, Groner MC, Zinner SH: Comparative study with enoxacin and netilmicin in a pharmcodynamic model to determine the importance of ratio of peak concentration to MIC for bactericidal activity and emergence of resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987, 31: 1054-1060.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Verpooten GA, Giuliano RA, Verbist L, Eestermans G, De Broe ME: Once-daily dosing decreases renal accumulation of gen-tamicin and netilmicin. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1989, 45: 22-27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Thomas JK, Forrest A, Bhavnani SM, Hyatt JM, Cheng A, Ballow CH, Schentag JJ: Pharmcodynamic evaluation of factors associated with the development of bacterial resistance in acutely ill patients during therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998, 42: 521-527.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Schentag JJ, Gilliland KK, Paladino JA: What have we learned from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic theories? Clin Infect Dis 2001, 32: S39-S46. 10.1086/319375CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© BioMed Central Ltd 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Internal Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care DivisionWashington University School of MedicineSt LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations