Primary prevention of Clostridium difficile infections - how difficult can it be?

Microbiome-Related and Infection Control Approaches to Primary and Secondary Prevention of Clostridioides difficile Infections

Clostridioides difficile infections (CDIs) have decreased in the past years, but since 2021, some hospitals have reported an increase in CDI rates. CDI remains a global concern and has been identified as an urgent threat to healthcare. Although multiple treatment options are available, prevention strategies are more limited. As CDI is an opportunistic infection that arises after the normally protective microbiome has been disrupted, preventive measures aimed at restoring the microbiome have been tested. Our aim is to update the present knowledge on these various preventive strategies published in the past five years (2018-2023) to guide clinicians and healthcare systems on how to best prevent CDI. A literature search was conducted using databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov) for phase 2-3 clinical trials for the primary or secondary prevention of CDI and microbiome and probiotics. As the main factor for Clostridium difficile infections is the disruption of the normally protective intestinal microbiome, strategies aimed at restoring the microbiome seem most rational. Some strains of probiotics, the use of fecal microbial therapy, and live biotherapeutic products offer promise to fill this niche; although, more large randomized controlled trials are needed that document the shifts in the microbiome population.

Perils and pitfalls of probiotic quasi-experimental studies for primary prevention of Clostridioides difficile infection: A review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Primary prevention of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infections (CDI) is an important but challenging infection control goal for hospitals and health care facilities. Enhanced infection control protocols have reduced CDI rates, but the problem persists and administration of probiotics to patients at risk could be very useful if shown to be safe and effective. Randomized controlled trials are largely impractical for primary prevention CDI trials due to large required study sizes and quasi-experimental studies are becoming more frequent as a method to assess this problem.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal is to review the published quasi-experimental studies adding probiotics to their infection control protocols to reduce CDI and determine the strengths and limitations for this type of study design.

METHODS

The literature was searched using PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline and Cochrane Databases and gastrointestinal meeting abstracts from January 2000 to January 2020 for quasi-experimental intervention studies testing various probiotics for the primary prevention of CDI.

RESULTS

We found 28 studies with 7 different types of probiotics (10 studies implementing a hospital-wide intervention, 6 studies targeting 1-3 wards, and 12 studies on either sustainability, cost-effectiveness or subgroup analysis). Some probiotics demonstrated a significant reduction in CDI rates; all four of the probiotic types given only on specific wards and 3 of the 4 probiotics given facility-wide. However, this type of study design was influenced by numerous factors which must be carefully accounted for in the analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Some probiotics may be an effective addition to infection control protocols to prevent C. difficile infections, but careful study design considerations are needed.

Incidence, Predictors, and Impact of Clostridium difficile Infection on Cardiac Surgery Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has been associated with morbidity and mortality after cardiac operations. The present study examined incidence, predictors, and impact of CDI on inpatient mortality and resource utilization.

METHODS

An analysis of adult patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting or valvular operations from 2005 to 2016 was performed using the National Inpatient Sample. Trends in CDI were assessed using a modified Cochran-Armitage analysis. Multivariable multilevel regressions were used to identify predictors of CDI, and propensity-matched pairs were generated using Mahalanobis 1-to-1 matching to compare mortality, length of stay, and costs of CDI patients with the non-CDI cohort.

RESULTS

The overall rate of CDI for an estimated 2,026,267 patients who underwent elective major cardiac surgery was 0.5% with no change in incidence (P for trend = .99). Predictors of CDI included advanced age (≥65 y; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58-2.24), female gender (AOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.15-1.44), heart failure (AOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.40-1.76), and combined coronary artery bypass grafting/valve operations (AOR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.24-2.08). Neither region nor bed size was associated with CDI. In contrast CDI mortality was lower at teaching hospitals compared with rural hospitals. Among matched pairs CDI was independently associated with higher mortality, length of stay, and Gross Domestic Product-adjusted costs.

CONCLUSIONS

CDI occurs in less than 1% of all elective, major cardiac operations. Patient predictors included advanced age, female gender, and several chronic comorbidities. Teaching institutions had the highest odds of CDI but lowest odds of case fatality. Further investigation of factors contributing to CDI is warranted to disseminate institutional best practices.

Long-Term Efficacy of Oral Vancomycin Prophylaxis for the Prevention of Clostridium difficile Recurrence

BACKGROUND

Limited evidence suggests that prophylactic oral vancomycin may be beneficial in preventing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) recurrence, but long-term efficacy is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term efficacy of oral vancomycin prophylaxis (OVP) in preventing CDI recurrence in subjects who require subsequent antibiotic exposure.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a community hospital. A total of 91 subjects with a history of CDI between January 2013 and December 2015 who had a subsequent hospitalization requiring systemic antibiotics within 12 months were evaluated. Thirty-two subjects who received prophylaxis with oral vancomycin were compared to 59 subjects who did not receive prophylaxis.

RESULTS

CDI recurrence within 12 months was significantly lower in subjects receiving OVP compared to those who did not receive OVP (6.3% vs 28.8%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04-0.77; P = .011) including patients whose previous CDI was an initial episode (3.7% [1/27] vs 28.3% [15/53]; OR: 10.3; 95% CI: 1.28-82.6; P = .009).

CONCLUSION

Use of OVP in subjects with a history of CDI up to 12 months prior to subsequent antibiotic exposure appears to reduce the risk of CDI recurrence for up to 12 months.

2019 update of the WSES guidelines for management of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in surgical patients

In the last three decades, Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has increased in incidence and severity in many countries worldwide. The increase in CDI incidence has been particularly apparent among surgical patients. Therefore, prevention of CDI and optimization of management in the surgical patient are paramount. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of this infection.

Prevention of Clostridium difficile Infection in Critically Ill Adults

The incidence and severity of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) remain high across intensive care units in the United States despite national efforts to decrease this escalating health care burden. Most published literature and guidelines address treatment rather than prevention, yet this approach may be too downstream to limit morbidity and mortality from the disease and its complications. Mechanisms to prevent CDI successfully include reducing modifiable risk factors and minimizing horizontal transmission of C. difficile spores between patients and the health care environment. Because CDI prevention is characterized by a bundled approach, it is difficult to quantify the individual impact of any one element; however, a number of patient- and facility-level strategies can be considered for CDI prevention. Robust hygiene strategies, diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship, and particular prophylaxis maneuvers such as continuation of oral vancomycin or fidaxomicin in the setting of systemic antibiotics have all demonstrated benefit. The preventive roles of deprescribing acid suppressants, routine use of probiotics, or early fecal microbiota transplantation remain unclear. The focus of this review is to summarize the evidence related to primary and secondary CDI prevention in critically ill adults and provide a concise implementation pathway for clinicians and policymakers.

Choosing an appropriate probiotic product for your patient: An evidence-based practical guide

INTRODUCTION

Clinicians and patients face a daunting task when choosing the most appropriate probiotic for their specific needs. Available preparations encompass a diverse and continuously expanding product base, with most available products lacking evidence-based trials that support their use. Even when evidence exists, not all probiotic products are equally effective for all disease prevention or treatment indications. At this point in time, drug regulatory agencies offer limited assistance with regard to guidance and oversight in most countries, including the U.S.

METHODS

We reviewed the current medical literature and sources on the internet to survey the types of available probiotic products and to determine which probiotics had evidence-based efficacy data. Standard medical databases from inception to June 2018 were searched and discussions with experts in the field were conducted. We graded the strength of the evidence for probiotics having multiple, randomized controlled trials and developed a guide for the practical selection of current probiotic products for specific uses.

RESULTS

We found the efficacy of probiotic products is both strain-specific and disease-specific. Important factors involved in choosing the appropriate probiotic include matching the strain(s) with the targeted disease or condition, type of formulation, dose used and the source (manufacturing quality control and shelf-life). While we found many probiotic products lacked confirmatory trials, we found sufficient evidence for 22 different types of probiotics from 249 trials to be included. For example, several types of probiotics had strong evidence for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea [Saccharomyces boulardii I-745, a three-strain mixture (Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, L. casei Lbc80r, L. rhamnosus CLR2) and L. casei DN114001]. Strong evidence was also found for four types of probiotics for the prevention of a variety of other diseases/conditions (enteral-feed associated diarrhea, travellers' diarrhea, necrotizing enterocolits and side-effects associated with H. pylori treatments. The evidence was most robust for the treatment of pediatric acute diarrhea based on 59 trials (7 types of probiotics have strong efficacy), while an eight-strain multi-strain mixture showed strong efficacy for inflammatory bowel disease and two types of probiotics had strong efficacy for irritable bowel disease. Of the 22 types of probiotics reviewed, 15 (68%) had strong-moderate evidence for efficacy for at least one type of disease.

CONCLUSION

The choice of an appropriate probiotic is multi-factored, based on the mode and type of disease indication and the specific efficacy of probiotic strain(s), as well as product quality and formulation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This review was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42018103979.