P43 In vitro activity of cefiderocol and comparators against Gram-negative pathogens: ARTEMIS study in the UK

Objectives

Cefiderocol (CFDC) is a novel siderophore cephalosporin approved in Europe for the treatment of infections caused by aerobic Gram-negative (GN) bacteria in adults with limited treatment options. The aim of the ARTEMIS study was to evaluate the in vitro activity of CFDC and comparators against recent clinical isolates collected across five countries in Europe. Here we report susceptibility data from isolates collected in the UK.

Methods

From January to December 2020, GN clinical isolates were collected from hospitalized patients from all infection sites (excluding the urinary tract). Duplicate isolates of the same species from a single patient were excluded. As a prespecified target, each laboratory collected 75 isolates, with: 20 Klebsiella spp., 20 other Enterobacterales, 20 Pseudomonas aeruginosa and 15 Acinetobacter baumannii isolates expected to be included. CFDC susceptibility testing was conducted using disc diffusion (with 30 μg discs) on Mueller–Hinton agar and Sensititre^™ broth microdilution (BMD) panels [EUMDROXF; centrally tested at International Health Management Associates (IHMA)]. Susceptibility by disc diffusion was reported using zone diameter breakpoints (BPs) of ≥22 mm (or ≥17 mm for A. baumannii isolates, corresponding to MIC values below the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic BPs of ≤2 mg/L). Comparator susceptibility was determined using custom research use only Sensititre^™ BMD panels (CMP2SHIH) according to the EUCAST method for BMD. Antimicrobial susceptibility was interpreted according to EUCAST clinical BPs (v.11 2021).

Results

In total, 517 isolates were collected from nine UK hospitals, of which: 308 (59.6%) were Enterobacterales [including 147 (28.4%) Klebsiella spp.], 148 (28.6%) were P. aeruginosa and 33 (6.4%) were A. baumannii. The most common sites of infection were bloodstream (n = 245; 47.4%), respiratory tract (n = 158; 30.6%) and skin (n = 59; 11.4%). A high percentage of Enterobacterales (90.2%), P. aeruginosa (96.6%) and A. baumannii (96.9%) isolates were susceptible to CFDC by disc diffusion. By central laboratory testing (MIC), 99.0% of Enterobacterales, 99.3% of P. aeruginosa and 93.9% of A. baumannii isolates were susceptible to CFDC. High susceptibility rates (>85%) were also observed for all comparator agents (Table 1). A total of 32/517 (6.2%) isolates were carbapenem resistant, the majority of which (22/32, 68.8%) were susceptible to CFDC by disc diffusion.

Conclusions

Among clinical GN isolates collected from UK hospitals in 2020, a high percentage (98.6%), including carbapenem-resistant isolates, were susceptible to CFDC by BMD. These data support the use of CFDC in patients with GN infections and limited treatment options. The differences identified between EUCAST disc diffusion and BMD using Sensititre^™ panels for CFDC highlight that disc diffusion underestimates Enterobacterales susceptibility to CFDC, which is mainly a result of the area of technical uncertainty (where isolates with MIC of 2 mg/L have a zone diameter of <22 mm and are characterized as resistant). This requires further investigation to explore whether the EUCAST zone diameter BP is optimal for CFDC disc testing.

An evaluation of the user acceptability of chlorhexidine handwash formulations

Four similar-looking preparations containing 4% chlorhexidine ('Hibiscrub', Surgiscrub', 'Uniscrub', 'Macrocide') were compared in a single-blind, randomized study in a group of 73 volunteers. The volunteers washed their hands with each preparation ten times over 9 h, one preparation day-1 on each of four days over two weeks. The acceptability of the agents was assessed using visual analogue scales which were analysed by paired t-test. There were marked differences between the products. 'Uniscrub' smelled worse (P less than 0.003) and felt worse than the others (P less than 0.003). 'Hibiscrub' lathered well but 'Macrocide' was found easiest to rinse off. 'Hibiscrub' and 'Surgiscrub' were the least irritant and had the best visual appearance. Despite apparent similarities, these chlorhexidine formulations varied in acceptability to users.

Treatment of congenital ptosis by maximal levator resection

The treatment of severe congenital ptosis may include frontalis suspension or maximal levator resection. A previous study of 145 consecutive frontalis suspensions for congenital ptosis showed a fairly high recurrence rate, frequent granuloma formation, and significant brow scars. In 28 patients undergoing 32 maximal levator resections utilizing our technique, 28 patients had excellent results. Two required reoperations and two additional patients had undercorrections that did not warrant reoperation. There were no significant complications. We believe that maximal levator resection is a better surgical alternative than frontalis suspension in the treatment of severe congenital ptosis whether unilateral or bilateral. In our experience, maximal levator resection provides a better cosmetic result and the recurrence rate is probably less than with frontalis suspension.