Antibiotic use in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): outcomes and associated factors

Predicting early appropriate therapy for patients infected by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative pathogens in intensive care units in Italy

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance among Gram-negative bacteria in intensive care units (ICUs) is linked with high morbidity and mortality in patients. In this study, we estimated the therapeutic coverage of various antibiotics, focusing on cefiderocol and comparators, administered empirically against an infection of unknown origin in the ICU.

METHODS

In the ARTEMIS surveillance study, susceptibilities of 624 Italian Gram-negative isolates to amikacin, aztreonam-avibactam, cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, ceftolozane-tazobactam, colistin, imipenem-relebactam, meropenem, and meropenem-vaborbactam were tested by broth microdilution, and results were interpreted by European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing breakpoints. The susceptibility rates from the ARTEMIS study were extrapolated to Gram-negative isolates obtained from 5,774 patients in Italian ICUs in 2021. The sum of the predicted susceptibilities of individual pathogens represented the overall likelihood of in vitro activity of each antibiotic as early targeted therapy for ICU patients.

RESULTS

A total of 624 Italian Gram-negative isolates included 206 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 138 Acinetobacter baumannii, 187 Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 93 Escherichia coli. Against A. baumannii, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and E. coli, the overall susceptibility rates for cefiderocol were 87.7%, 96.8%, 99%, and 100%, respectively; and for comparator agents, 8.7-96.4%, 25.7-100%, 73.3-100%, and 89.2-100%, respectively. Among the subset of meropenem-resistant isolates, susceptibility rates of A. baumannii, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa to cefiderocol were 86.4%, 96.2% and 100%, respectively. Corresponding susceptibility rates to comparator agents were 0-96.8%, 0-100%, and 6.4-100%, respectively. There were no meropenem-resistant isolates of E. coli. The extrapolation of data to isolates from Italian ICUs showed that the highest likelihood of therapeutic coverage, both overall and among meropenem-resistant isolates, was reported for colistin (96.8% and 72.2%, respectively) and cefiderocol (95.7% and 71.4%, respectively). All other antibiotics were associated with a likelihood below 73% overall and between 0% and 41.4% for meropenem-resistant isolates.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on confirmed susceptibility rates and reported ICU prevalence of multiple Gram-negative species, cefiderocol showed a higher predicted therapeutic coverage and utility in ICUs compared with comparator beta-lactam-beta-lactamase inhibitor antibiotics. Cefiderocol may be a promising early treatment option for patients at high risk of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections in the ICU.

The Impact of Early Antibiotic Use on Clinical Outcomes of Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Purpose

Early empiric antibiotics were prescribed to numerous patients during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, the potential impact of empiric antibiotic therapy on the clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is yet unknown.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, early antibiotics use cohort was defined as control group, which was compared with no antibiotic use and delayed antibiotic use cohorts for all-cause mortality during hospitalization. The 1:2 propensity score matched patient populations were further developed to adjust confounding factors. Survival curves were compared between different cohorts using a Log rank test to assess the early antibiotic effectiveness.

Results

We included a total of 1472 COVID-19 hospitalized patients, of whom 87.4% (1287 patients) received early antibiotic prescriptions. In propensity-score-matched datasets, our analysis comprised 139 patients with non-antibiotic use (with 278 matched controls) and 27 patients with deferred-antibiotic use (with 54 matched controls). Patients with older ages, multiple comorbidities, severe and critical COVID-19 subtypes, higher serum infection indicators, and inflammatory indicators at admission were more likely to receive early antibiotic prescriptions. After adjusting confounding factors likely to influence the prognosis, there is no significant difference in all-cause mortality (HR=1.000(0.246-4.060), p = 1.000) and ICU admission (HR=0.436(0.093-2.04), p = 0.293), need for mechanical ventilation (HR=0.723(0.296-1.763), p = 0.476) and tracheal intubation (HR=1.338(0.221-8.103), p = 0.751) were observed between early antibiotics use cohort and non-antibiotic use cohort.

Conclusion

Early antibiotics were frequently prescribed to patients in more severe disease condition at admission. However, early antibiotic treatment failed to demonstrate better clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the propensity-score-matched cohorts.

The Evolving Challenge of Appropriate Antibiotics Use in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Literature Review

The issue of bacterial infections in COVID-19 patients has received increasing attention. Scant data are available on the impact of bacterial superinfection and antibiotic administration on the outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We conducted a literature review from 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2024 to assess the current burden of bacterial infection and the evidence for antibiotic use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Published articles providing data on antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients were identified through computerized literature searches with the search terms [(antibiotic) AND (COVID-19)] or [(antibiotic treatment) AND (COVID-19)]. PubMed and SCOPUS databases were searched from 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2024. No attempt was made to obtain information about unpublished studies. English language restriction was applied. The quality of the included studies was evaluated by the tool recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Both quantitative and qualitative information were summarized by means of textual descriptions. Five hundred fifty-one studies were identified, and twenty-nine studies were included in this systematic review. Of the 29 included studies, 18 studies were on the prevalence of bacterial infection and antibiotic use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients; 4 studies reported on the efficacy of early antibiotic use in COVID-19; 4 studies were on the use of sepsis biomarkers to improve antibiotic use; 3 studies were on the efficacy of antimicrobial stewardship programs and predictive models among COVID-19-hospitalized patients. The quality of included studies was high in 35% and medium in 62%. High rates of hospital-acquired infections were reported among COVID-19 patients, ranging between 7.5 and 37.7%. A high antibiotic resistance rate was reported among COVID-19 patients developing hospital-acquired infections, with a high in-hospital mortality rate. The studies evaluating multi-faceted antimicrobial stewardship interventions reported efficacy in decreasing antibiotic consumption and lower in-hospital mortality.

Using risk factors and markers to predict bacterial respiratory co-/superinfections in COVID-19 patients: is the antibiotic steward's toolbox full or empty?

BACKGROUND

Adequate diagnosis of bacterial respiratory tract co-/superinfection (bRTI) in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients is challenging, as there is insufficient knowledge about the role of risk factors and (para)clinical parameters in the identification of bacterial co-/superinfection in the COVID-19 setting. Empirical antibiotic therapy is mainly based on COVID-19 severity and expert opinion, rather than on scientific evidence generated since the start of the pandemic.

PURPOSE

We report the best available evidence regarding the predictive value of risk factors and (para)clinical markers in the diagnosis of bRTI in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team identified different potential risk factors and (para)clinical predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 and formulated one or two research questions per topic. After a thorough literature search, research gaps were identified, and suggestions concerning further research were formulated. The quality of this narrative review was ensured by following the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles.

RESULTS

Taking into account the scarcity of scientific evidence for markers and risk factors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients, to date, COVID-19 severity is the only parameter which can be associated with higher risk of developing bRTI.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the usefulness of risk factors and (para)clinical factors as predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients is scarce. Robust studies are needed to optimise antibiotic prescribing and stewardship activities in the context of COVID-19.

Antimicrobial resistance in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Frequent use of antibiotics in patients with COVID-19 threatens to exacerbate antimicrobial resistance. We aimed to establish the prevalence and predictors of bacterial infections and antimicrobial resistance in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of bacterial co-infections (identified within ≤48 h of presentation) and secondary infections (>48 h after presentation) in outpatients or hospitalised patients with COVID-19. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Research Database to identify cohort studies, case series, case-control trials, and randomised controlled trials with populations of at least 50 patients published in any language between Jan 1, 2019, and Dec 1, 2021. Reviews, editorials, letters, pre-prints, and conference proceedings were excluded, as were studies in which bacterial infection was not microbiologically confirmed (or confirmed via nasopharyngeal swab only). We screened titles and abstracts of papers identified by our search, and then assessed the full text of potentially relevant articles. We reported the pooled prevalence of bacterial infections and antimicrobial resistance by doing a random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. Our primary outcomes were the prevalence of bacterial co-infection and secondary infection, and the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens among patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and bacterial infections. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021297344).

FINDINGS

We included 148 studies of 362  976 patients, which were done between December, 2019, and May, 2021. The prevalence of bacterial co-infection was 5·3% (95% CI 3·8-7·4), whereas the prevalence of secondary bacterial infection was 18·4% (14·0-23·7). 42 (28%) studies included comprehensive data for the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among bacterial infections. Among people with bacterial infections, the proportion of infections that were resistant to antimicrobials was 60·8% (95% CI 38·6-79·3), and the proportion of isolates that were resistant was 37·5% (26·9-49·5). Heterogeneity in the reported prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in organisms was substantial (I2=95%).

INTERPRETATION

Although infrequently assessed, antimicrobial resistance is highly prevalent in patients with COVID-19 and bacterial infections. Future research and surveillance assessing the effect of COVID-19 on antimicrobial resistance at the patient and population level are urgently needed.

FUNDING

WHO.

Plant Spices as a Source of Antimicrobial Synergic Molecules to Treat Bacterial and Viral Co-Infections

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the lack of antiviral agents available for human use, while the complexity of the physiological changes caused by coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) imposed the prescription of multidrug pharmacotherapy to treat infected patients. In a significant number of cases, it was necessary to add antibiotics to the prescription to decrease the risk of co-infections, preventing the worsening of the patient's condition. However, the precautionary use of antibiotics corroborated to increase bacterial resistance. Since the development of vaccines for COVID-19, the pandemic scenario has changed, but the development of new antiviral drugs is still a major challenge. Research for new drugs with synergistic activity against virus and resistant bacteria can produce drug leads to be used in the treatment of mild cases of COVID-19 and to fight other viruses and new viral diseases. Following the repurposing approach, plant spices have been searched for antiviral lead compounds, since the toxic effects of plants that are traditionally consumed are already known, speeding up the drug discovery process. The need for effective drugs in the context of viral diseases is discussed in this review, with special focus on plant-based spices with antiviral and antibiotic activity. The activity of plants against resistant bacteria, the diversity of the components present in plant extracts and the synergistic interaction of these metabolites and industrialized antibiotics are discussed, with the aim of contributing to the development of antiviral and antibiotic drugs. A literature search was performed in electronic databases such as Science Direct; SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online); LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences); Elsevier, SpringerLink; and Google Scholar, using the descriptors: antiviral plants, antibacterial plants, coronavirus treatment, morbidities and COVID-19, bacterial resistance, resistant antibiotics, hospital-acquired infections, spices of plant origin, coronaviruses and foods, spices with antiviral effect, drug prescriptions and COVID-19, and plant synergism. Articles published in English in the period from 2020 to 2022 and relevant to the topic were used as the main inclusion criteria.

Rapid Detection of Bacterial and Fungal Pathogens Using the T2MR versus Blood Culture in Patients with Severe COVID-19

A high rate of bacterial and fungal superinfections was reported in critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, diagnosis can be challenging. The aim of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity and the clinical utility of the point-of-care method T2 magnetic resonance (T2MR) with the gold standard: the blood culture. T2MR can potentially detect five different Candida species and six common bacteria (so-called "ESKAPE" pathogens including Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinet`obacter baumanii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecium). If superinfection was suspected in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit, blood culture and two panels of T2MR were performed. Eighty-five diagnostic bundles were performed in 60 patients in total. T2MR detected an ESKAPE pathogen in 9 out of 85 (10.6%) samples, compared to BC in 3 out of 85 (3.5%). A Candida species was detected in 7 of 85 (8.2%) samples of T2MR compared to 1 out of 85(1.2%) in blood culture. The mean time to positive test result in samples with concordant positive results was 4.5 h with T2MR and 52.5 h with blood culture. The additional use of T2MR enables a highly sensitive and rapid detection of ESKAPE and Candida pathogens. IMPORTANCE Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to a high number of deaths since the beginning of the pandemic worldwide. One of the reasons is the high number of bacterial and fungal superinfections in patients suffering from critical disease. However, diagnosis is often challenging. In this study we could show that the additional use of the culture-independent method T2MR did not only show a much higher detection rate of bacterial and fungal pathogens but also a significantly shorter time until detection and therapy change compared to the gold standard: the blood culture. The implementation of T2MRin the care of patients with severe course of COVID-19 might lead to an earlier sufficient antimicrobial therapy and as a result lower mortality and less use of broad-spectrum unnecessary therapy reducing the risk of resistance development.

Does the COVID Pandemic Modify the Antibiotic Resistance of Uropathogens in Female Patients? A New Storm?

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) represent a common pathology among female patients, leading to overprescribing antibiotics, globally. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically increased the incidence of this particular viral pneumonia with secondary bacterial superinfection, resulting in continuous therapeutic or prophylactic recommendations of antibiotic treatment; thus, an updated analysis of current antimicrobial resistance among uropathogens is mandatory. This cross-sectional retrospective study conducted in two university hospitals in Bucharest, Romania analyzed 2469 positive urine cultures, among two different periods of 6 months, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common pathogen was Escherichia coli 1505 (60.95%), followed by Klebsiella spp. 426 (17.25%). Enterococcus spp. was the leading Gram-positive pathogen 285 (11.54%). In gram negative bacteria, in almost all cases, an increased in resistance was observed, but the highest increase was represented by quinolones in Klebsiella spp., from 16.87% to 35.51% and Pseudomonas from 30.3% to 77.41%; a significant increase in resistance was also observed for carbapenems. Surprisingly, a decrease in resistance to Penicillin was observed in Enterococcus spp., but the overall tendency of increased resistance is also maintained for gram positive pathogens. The lack of data on the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on uropathogens’ resistance promotes these findings as important for every clinician treating UTIs and for every specialist in the medical field in promoting reasonable recommendations of antibiotic therapies.