Pyelonephritis treatment in the community emergency department: Cephalosporins vs. first-line agents

Cephalosporins for the treatment of uncomplicated pyelonephritis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The 2011 Infectious Diseases Society of America and European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases guidelines recommend ciprofloxacin or sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (SMX-TMP) as first-line agents to treat uncomplicated acute pyelonephritis (APN).

OBJECTIVE

With increasing antimicrobial resistance rates and recent changes in practice patterns, the objective of this systematic review was to describe the effectiveness of cephalosporins for uncomplicated APN in more recently published literature.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used for reporting. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for publications between January 2010 and September 2022. Eligible articles detailed patients with uncomplicated APN, treated with first- to fourth-generation cephalosporins, and identified a clinical, microbiological, or health care utilization outcome. Studies with more than 30% of complicated APN patients, non-English-language studies, case reports, case series, pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic studies, and in vitro laboratory or animal studies were excluded. Screening, review, and extraction were performed independently by 2 researchers, plus a third for conflict resolution. Critical appraisal of studies was performed using Joanna Briggs Institute checklists.

RESULTS

Eight studies met inclusion, including 5 cohort studies (62.5%), 2 randomized controlled trials (25%), and 1 nonrandomized experimental study (12.5%). Cephalosporins most used across the studies included cefazolin, cephalexin, cefuroxime, cefotaxime, cefdinir, cefditoren, and ceftriaxone. Outcomes assessed were diverse, including clinical or microbiological success and time to defervescence or symptom resolution. Cephalosporins displayed effectiveness for the treatment of acute uncomplicated APN regardless of study design or the presence of a comparison group. No trials reported inferiority of clinical treatment outcomes compared with a fluoroquinolone or SMX-TMP.

CONCLUSION

Cephalosporins may be viable treatment options for the management of uncomplicated APN.

First-generation cephalosporins for the treatment of complicated upper urinary tract infection in adults: A systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

Complicated upper urinary tract infection (UTI) is a significant cause of infectious morbidity and in-hospital antibiotic therapy. However, the use of first-generation cephalosporins in this scenario is not clearly defined.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-generation cephalosporins for community-acquired complicated upper UTI in adults requiring hospital care.

METHODS

Systematic review by searching in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL) and trials registers, with screened and selected the references, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. The results were presented in a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Seven randomized clinical trials were included. We did not identify statistically significant differences when comparing first-generation cephalosporins with other antimicrobials for outcomes of clinical cure, length of hospital stay, and reinfection. However, a lower probability of microbiological cure and a higher probability of relapse were identified in the first-generation cephalosporin group in 3 of 7 studies and in 2 of 5 studies, respectively. No serious adverse effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

First-generation cephalosporins could be a potential therapy in this setting, nevertheless it should be considered the low quality of evidence for analyzed outcomes, due to limitations of risk of bias and imprecision. It is essential to carry out comparative studies in which the benefits and harms of these antibiotics are evaluated.

Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescriptions for Urinary Tract Infections

Introduction

Urinary tract infections (UTI) are a common indication for antibiotic use in the emergency department (ED). With antibiotic resistance on the rise, it is essential that antibiotics be prescribed appropriately for UTIs. Our objective was to evaluate the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions by ED providers for uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of females ages 2–50 years seen in an academic ED from January 2017 to April 2018 diagnosed with UTI. We assessed the appropriateness of discharge antibiotic prescriptions, as determined by adherence to clinical practice guidelines, best evidence for the particular indication (cystitis vs pyelonephritis for children and adults), and the local antibiogram.

Results

A total of 421 patients were included in this study. Of these, 60 children and 198 adults were diagnosed with cystitis, and 47 children and 116 adults were diagnosed with pyelonephritis. Treatment in the absence of true infection was common, with culture-confirmed UTI occurring in only 17/50 (34%) of children and 60/129 (47%) of adults diagnosed with cystitis, and 23/40 (58%) of children and 58/87 (67%) of adults diagnosed with pyelonephritis, among patients who had urine cultures. The type of antibiotic prescribed was appropriate in 53/60 (88%) of children and 135/198 (68%) of adults with cystitis, and 38/47 (81%) of children and 53/116 (46%) of adults with pyelonephritis. The most common inappropriate antibiotic types were beta-lactams in adults (n = 92), nitrofurantoin for pyelonephritis (n = 16), and amoxicillin (n = 15). Dosing and duration errors were also common, occurring in 122/279 (44%) of prescriptions of an appropriate antibiotic type. The frequency of errors in the type of antibiotic prescribed was similar among provider types (attending physician, resident physician, and advanced practice clinician; p = 0.926).

Conclusion

This study reveals room for improvement in antibiotic prescription practices across provider cohorts in the ED for the management of uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis in females.

Are oral cefuroxime axetil, cefixime and cefditoren pivoxil adequate to treat uncomplicated acute pyelonephritis after switching from intravenous therapy? A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic perspective

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study is to assess, by means of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) analysis using the Monte Carlo simulation, the adequacy of oral cephalosporins cefuroxime axetil, cefixime and cefditoren at different dosing regimens as switch therapy after intravenous cephalosporin treatment in uncomplicated acute pyelonephritis.

METHODS

The methodology included: (i) dosing regimen selection and acquisition of pharmacokinetic data; (ii) microbiological data acquisition; and (iii) Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the PTA (probability of PK/PD target attainment) and CFR (cumulative fraction of response), as indicators of treatment success.

RESULTS

At the current susceptibility breakpoints defined by EUCAST and CLSI for either cefuroxime axetil or cefixime, the probability of bactericidal target attainment is zero for the dosage regimens simulated. Considering the bactericidal target %fT_>MIC>70%, the likelihood of the cefuroxime 500-mg q8h regimen or the cefixime 200-mg q12h regimen producing this exposure or achieving this target is only above 90% for organisms yielding MICs≤0.5mg/l and MICs≤0.25mg/l, respectively. Cefditoren pivoxil 400mg q12h provided probabilities of bactericidal target attainment of 80% or higher for MICs≤0.03mg/l, and ≤0.25mg/l if considering total instead of free drug concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the PK/PD target attainment analysis reveal that the likelihood of treatment success based upon the current breakpoints proposed by either EUCAST or CLSI is low. Of the three cephalosporins, cefixime 400mg q12h prove to be the best option in oral APN treatment, although this regimen is currently off label.

The challenge of de-labeling penicillin allergy

BACKGROUND

Even though 8%-25% of most populations studied globally are labeled as penicillin allergic, most diagnoses of penicillin allergy are made in childhood and relate to events that are either not allergic in nature, are low risk for immediate hypersensitivity, or are a potential true allergy that has waned over time. Penicillin allergy labels directly impact antimicrobial stewardship by leading to use of less effective and broader spectrum antimicrobials and are associated with antimicrobial resistance. They may also delay appropriate antimicrobial therapy and lead to increased risk of specific adverse healthcare outcomes. Operationalizing penicillin allergy de-labeling into a new arm of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) has become an increasing global focus.

METHODS

We performed an evidence-based narrative review of the literature of penicillin allergy label carriage, the adverse effects of penicillin allergy labels, and current approaches and barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling. Over the period 1928-2018 in Pubmed and Medline, search terms used included "penicillin allergy" or "penicillin hypersensitivity" alone or in combination with "adverse events," "testing," "evaluation," "effects," "label," "de-labeling," "prick or epicutaneous," and "intradermal" skin testing, "oral challenge or provocation," "cross-reactivity," and "antimicrobial stewardship".

RESULTS

Penicillin allergy labels are highly prevalent, largely inaccurate and their carriage may lead to unnecessary treatment and inferior outcomes with alternative agents as well as adverse public health outcomes such as antibiotic resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

Operationalizing penicillin allergy de-labeling as an aspect of ASP has become an increasing global focus. There is a need for validated approaches that optimally combine the use of history and ingestion challenge with or without proceeding formal skin testing to tackle penicillin allergy efficiently within complex healthcare systems. At the same time, there is great promise for penicillin allergy evaluation and de-labeling as an individual and public health strategy to reduce adverse healthcare outcomes, improve antimicrobial stewardship, and decrease healthcare costs.