Oral versus parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of cellulitis: a randomized non-inferiority trial

Cost analysis of one-time intravenous antibiotic doses in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Research shows that one-time doses of intravenous (IV) antibiotics do not improve resolution of infection. However, providers continue to use them-especially in the emergency department (ED). Very few studies have aimed to quantify the cost of this practice.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the difference in average total cost of ED stay between patients who received a one-time dose of IV antibiotics in the ED before discharging on oral antibiotics and patients who were just discharged on oral antibiotics. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the differences in durations of stay between the 2 groups, as well as the differences in adverse drug effects and need for health care contact after discharge.

METHODS

Chart review was conducted to identify patients who received and did not receive a one-time dose of IV antibiotics in the ED between April 30, 2020, and April 30, 2022. A microcosting approach was used to determine ED-associated costs per patient. Comparisons in primary and secondary outcomes were performed using statistical inferential tests.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients were analyzed in each group. Patients who received a one-time dose of IV antibiotics in the ED before being discharged on oral antibiotics had an average length of stay of 4.55 hours, as opposed to patients who did not receive a one-time dose of IV antibiotics before being discharged on oral antibiotics who had an average length of stay of 2.82 hours (absolute difference 1.73 hours, P < 0.001). One-time dosing of IV antibiotics in the ED incurred an additional cost of approximately $556 per patient, totaling to more than $56,000 in our study cohort.

CONCLUSION

The use of one-time IV antibiotics in the ED did not confer any additional benefits to patients. The use of one-time doses resulted in statistically significant reduced throughput in the ED and statistically significant increased health care costs.

Association between antibiotic administration before discharge and emergency department length of stay for urinary tract infection: A retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with urinary tract infections (UTIs) may have treatment initiated in the emergency department (ED) before discharge with an antibiotic prescription. The effect of a single antibiotic dose administered before discharge on ED length of stay (LOS) is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the LOS and the rate of revisits within 30 days among patients diagnosed as having UTIs other than pyelonephritis who received parenteral, oral, or no antibiotic during an ED visit.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with a diagnosis of UTI who received an antibiotic prescription at discharge from a single community ED in the United States between 2019 and 2020. Patients were excluded if they were admitted to the hospital, were diagnosed as having pyelonephritis, or had an ED visit in the previous 30 days. ED LOS was compared using 3-factor analysis of variance. ED revisits at 72 hours and 30 days were compared using the chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 694 patients with an ED visit for UTI and an antibiotic prescription at discharge were included. The mean age of the study population was 58 years. Parenteral antibiotic administration in the ED was associated with a 60-minute increase in ED LOS compared with those who received an oral antibiotic (P < 0.001) and a 30-minute increase in ED LOS compared with no antibiotic (P < 0.001). No differences were observed in revisits to the ED at 72 hours (5%, 5%, 2%; P = 0.17) or 30 days (15%, 16%, 17%: P = 0.98) among patients who received parenteral, oral, or no antibiotic before discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of parenteral antibiotic before discharge was associated with an increased ED LOS compared with treatment with oral antibiotic or discharge without ED treatment. ED revisit rates were similar regardless of ED treatment.

Insufficient Representation of Patients With Obesity in Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Antimicrobials for Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: A Scoping Review

Persons with obesity (PwO) represent approximately 50% of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) in the United States (US). There are currently insufficient data in PwO for drugs used for ABSSSIs. We conducted a scoping review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2000 and 2022 to describe how frequently body size measures were reported. Weight and/or body mass index (BMI) were recorded in approximately 50% of the 69 RCTs. The average weights or BMIs were lower than US averages for most RCTs reporting data. None evaluated the impact of body size on outcomes in the original publication. Only 30% of newly approved drugs mention PwO representation in the prescribing information. More representative recruitment of PwO into RCTs is needed to help clinicians evaluate efficacy in these patients. We suggest that the Food and Drug Administration require companies to submit plans to ensure adequate PwO inclusion and that authors of RCTs report subgroup results based on body size.

The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis is highly variable with respect to agent, dose, and route of administration. As there is uncertainty about optimal/appropriate time to reassess, we aimed to assess time to clinical response.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials reporting clinical response of uncomplicated cellulitis to antibiotic treatment over multiple timepoints. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to June 2021 without language restrictions. The primary outcome was time to clinical response. Other outcomes were components of clinical response (pain, severity score, redness, edema measured at ≥ 2 timepoints) and the proportion of patients with treatment failure. We performed a pooled estimate of the average time to clinical response together with 95% confidence intervals using a random effects model.

RESULTS

We included 32 randomized controlled trials (n = 13,576 participants). The mean time to clinical response was 1.68 days (95%CI 1.48-1.88; I² = 76%). The response to treatment for specific components was as follows: ~ 50% reduction of pain and severity score by day 5, a ~ 33% reduction in area of redness by day 2-3, and a 30-50% reduction of proportion of patients with edema by day 2-4. Treatment failure was variably defined with an overall failure rate of 12% (95%CI 9-16%).

CONCLUSION

The best available data suggest the optimal time to clinical reassessment is between 2 and 4 days, but this must be interpreted with caution due to considerable heterogeneity and small number of included studies.

Route and duration of antibiotic therapy in acute cellulitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and harms of antibiotic treatment

OBJECTIVES

Compared with guideline recommendations, antibiotic overuse is common in treating cellulitis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses on antibiotic route and duration of treatment for cellulitis in adults and children.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and trial registries from inception to Dec 11, 2019 for interventional and observational studies of antibiotic treatment for cellulitis. Exclusions included case series/reports, pre-septal/orbital cellulitis and non-English language articles. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to produce summary relative risk (RR) estimates for our primary outcome of clinical response.

PROSPERO

CRD42018100602.

RESULTS

We included 47/8423 articles, incorporating data from eleven trials (1855 patients) in two meta-analyses. The overall risk of bias was moderate. Only two trials compared the same antibiotic agent in each group. We found no evidence of difference in clinical response rates for antibiotic route or duration (RR(oral:IV)=1.12, 95%CI 0.98-1.27, I²=32% and RR(shorter:longer)=0.99, 95%CI 0•96-1.03, I² = 0%, respectively). Findings were consistent in observational studies. Follow-up data beyond 30 days were sparse.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for antibiotic treatment decisions in cellulitis is flawed by biased comparisons, short follow-up and lack of data around harms of antibiotic overuse. Future research should focus on developing patient-tailored antibiotic prescribing for cellulitis to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use.

Oral or intravenous antibiotics?

Intravenous antibiotics are overused in hospitals. Many infections can be managed with oral antibiotics

Oral antibiotics avoid the adverse effects of intravenous administration. They are also usually less expensive

When intravenous antibiotics are indicated, it may be possible to switch to oral therapy after a short course. There are guidelines to aid the clinician with the timing of the switch so that there is no loss of efficacy

Infections that may be suitable for a short course of intravenous antibiotic include pneumonia, complicated urinary tract infections, certain intra-abdominal infections, Gram-negative bacteraemia, acute exacerbations of chronic lung disease, and skin and soft tissue infections

Bone and joint infections and infective endocarditis are managed with prolonged courses of intravenous antibiotics. However, there is research looking at the feasibility of an earlier switch to oral antibiotics in these conditions

Is coverage of S. aureus necessary in cellulitis/erysipelas? A literature review

BACKGROUND

Empirical treatment of patients with cellulitis/erysipelas usually targets both streptococci and methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA). However, the recommendation to empirically cover MSSA is weak and based on low-quality evidence.

METHODS AND OBJECTIVE

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed and clinical trial registries to assess the role of S. aureus in cellulitis/erysipelas and the need for empirical MSSA coverage.

RESULTS

Combined microbiological and serological data, and response to penicillin monotherapy suggest that streptococci are responsible for the vast majority of cases of cellulitis/erysipelas. However, most cases are non-culturable and the specificity of microbiological and serological studies is questionable based on recent studies using molecular techniques. According to epidemiological data and three randomized controlled trials, empirical coverage of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) is not recommended for most patients, despite the high prevalence of MRSA in many areas. If MRSA is indeed not an important cause of uncomplicated cellulitis/erysipelas, then the same may apply to MSSA. Based on indirect comparison of data from clinical studies, cure rates with penicillin monotherapy (to which most MSSA are resistant) are comparable to the cure rates reported in many studies using wider-spectrum antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Considering the limitations of microbiological studies in identifying the pathogens responsible for cellulitis/erysipelas, treatment needs to be guided by clinical trials. Trials comparing penicillin or amoxicillin monotherapy to MSSA-covering regimens are needed to definitively answer whether empirical coverage of MSSA is needed and to identify the subset of patients that can be safely treated with penicillin or amoxicillin monotherapy.

Assessment of Antibiotic Treatment of Cellulitis and Erysipelas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

The optimum antibiotic treatment for cellulitis and erysipelas lacks consensus. The available trial data do not demonstrate the superiority of any agent, and data are limited on the most appropriate route of administration or duration of therapy.

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of antibiotic therapy for non-surgically acquired cellulitis.

Data Sources

The following databases were searched to June 28, 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2016, issue 5), Medline (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Information System (LILACS) (from 1982). In addition, 5 trials databases and the reference lists of included studies were searched. Further searches of PubMed and Google Scholar were undertaken from June 28, 2016, to December 31, 2018.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials comparing different antibiotics, routes of administration, and treatment durations were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

For data collection and analysis, the standard methodological procedures of the Cochrane Collaboration were used. For dichotomous outcomes, the risk ratio and its 95% CI were calculated. A summary of findings table was created for the primary end points, adopting the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the proportion of patients cured, improved, recovered, or symptom-free or symptom-reduced at the end of treatment, as reported by the trial. The secondary outcome was any adverse event.

Results

A total of 43 studies with a total of 5999 evaluable participants, whose age ranged from 1 month to 96 years, were included. Cellulitis was the primary diagnosis in only 15 studies (35%), and in other studies the median (interquartile range) proportion of patients with cellulitis was 29.7% (22.9%-50.3%). Overall, no evidence was found to support the superiority of any 1 antibiotic over another, and antibiotics with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus did not add an advantage. Use of intravenous antibiotics over oral antibiotics and treatment duration of longer than 5 days were not supported by evidence.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, only low-quality evidence was found for the most appropriate agent, route of administration, and duration of treatment for patients with cellulitis; future trials need to use a standardized set of outcomes, including severity scoring, dosing, and duration of therapy.

Treatment failure definitions for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

There is currently no uniform definition for antimicrobial treatment failure for adults with non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). The objective of this systematic review was to identify treatment failure definitions and their common components in the literature.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched from inception to March 2019. Two independent reviewers identified studies involving adults (age ≥ 18 years) with non-purulent SSTIs in which antimicrobial treatment failure was a defined outcome. There were no language restrictions. Only randomized trials or observational studies were included.

RESULTS

After screening 4953 abstracts, 26 studies (N = 6629 patients) met full inclusion criteria. Reported treatment failure ranged from 0 to 29.5%. The most common definition components were hospital admission (78.9%), change in antibiotics (65.4%), and persistent or worsening signs and symptoms of infection (34.6%). Only one study listed specific criteria for persistent or worsening signs and symptoms of infection.

CONCLUSIONS

For studies involving non-purulent SSTIs, the outcome of treatment failure is inconsistently defined and reported failure rates are highly variable. This systematic review has highlighted the need for more robust treatment failure definitions for non-purulent SSTIs. Research should focus on the development of a uniform treatment failure definition that should be used in future studies.

The optimal duration of treatment for skin and soft tissue infections and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current finding on SSTIs/ABSSSIs treatment duration.

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2013, the FDA approved the definition of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). From a clinical point of view, the new definition may present some advantages: the definition of the severity of the disease, the measurement of reduction in lesion size, and effectiveness of treatment primary endpoint at 48-72 h after treatment initiation. New therapeutic options with improved efficacy, safety, and/or pharmacodynamics are available for ABSSSIs and so far, several questions still need to be addressed for the management of these infections, including treatment duration.

SUMMARY

There is a wide variation of duration of antimicrobial treatment in skin and soft tissue infections. Plenty of published data available suggest that we should focus on the early response to shorten duration of treatment, and that the antimicrobial stewardship perspective is extremely helpful in underscoring the need for composite outcomes in clinical practice, as multiple tools are available to increase cost-efficacy, including reduction of treatment changes, early oral switch, early discharge (even from the Emergency Department), outpatient antimicrobial treatment, long-acting antibiotics, and all together, de-escalation treatment strategies.

Proposal for shorter antibiotic therapies

OBJECTIVES

Reducing antibiotic consumption has now become a major public health priority. Reducing treatment duration is one of the means to achieve this objective. Guidelines on the therapeutic management of the most frequent infections recommend ranges of treatment duration in the ratio of one to two. The Recommendation Group of the French Infectious Diseases Society (SPILF) was asked to collect literature data to then recommend the shortest treatment durations possible for various infections.

METHODS

Analysis of the literature focused on guidelines published in French and English, supported by a systematic search on PubMed. Articles dating from one year before the guidelines publication to August 31, 2015 were searched on the website.

RESULTS

The shortest treatment durations based on the relevant clinical data were suggested for upper and lower respiratory tract infections, central venous catheter-related and uncomplicated primary bacteremia, infective endocarditis, bacterial meningitis, intra-abdominal, urinary tract, upper reproductive tract, bone and joint, skin and soft tissue infections, and febrile neutropenia. Details of analyzed articles were shown in tables.

CONCLUSION

This work stresses the need for new well-conducted studies evaluating treatment durations for some common infections. Following the above-mentioned work focusing on existing literature data, the Recommendation Group of the SPILF suggests specific study proposals.

Addressing Concerns about Changing the Route of Antimicrobial Administration from Intravenous to Oral in Adult Inpatients

BACKGROUND

Many health care institutions are in the process of establishing antimicrobial stewardship programs. Changing the route of administration of antimicrobial agents from intravenous to oral (IV to PO) is a simple, well-recognized intervention that is often part of an antimicrobial stewardship program. However, the attending health care team may have concerns about making this switch.

OBJECTIVES

To provide insights into common concerns related to IV to PO conversion, with the aim of helping antimicrobial stewardship teams to address them.

DATA SOURCES

Published clinical trials and reviews were identified from a literature search of Ovid MEDLINE with the keywords (step down or switch or conversion or transition or sequential) and (antibiotics or antibacterial agents or antimicrobial or anti-infective agents).

DATA SYNTHESIS

The following issues are addressed in this review: benefits of the oral route, serum concentrations yielded by the oral formulation, source of pharmacokinetic data, clinical outcomes, provision of care in the intensive care unit, fear of therapeutic failure, and administration of antimicrobials via feeding tube.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering a change to oral therapy, it is important to have a thorough understanding of key aspects of the antimicrobial agent, the patient, and the disease being treated. The antimicrobial stewardship team has an important role in facilitating IV to PO conversion, educating prescribers, and addressing any concerns or reservations that may interfere with timely transition from IV to PO administration.

Bacterial infections of the folds (intertriginous areas)

The axillary, inguinal, post-auricular, and inframammary areas are considered skin folds, where one skin layer touches another. Skin fold areas have a high moisture level and elevated temperature, both of which increase the possibility of microorganism overgrowth. A massive amount of bacteria live on the surface of the skin. Some are purely commensal; thus, only their overgrowth can cause infections, most of which are minor. In some cases, colonization of pathogenic bacteria causes more serious infections. This contribution reviews the bacterial infections of the skin fold areas.