Is It Safe to Treat Stable Patients with Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections with High-Resistant-Rate Antibiotics?
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Leung, Y.Y.; Ma, K.K.; Tsang, W.T.; Lau, C.L.; Ko, S.; Chan, W.L.; Ng, F. A retrospective study of geriatric patients presenting with fever to an accident and emergency department in Hong Kong. Hong Kong J. Emerg. Med. 2008, 15, 88–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keating, H.J., 3rd; Klimek, J.J.; Levine, D.S.; Kiernan, F.J. Effect of aging on the clinical significance of fever in ambulatory adult patients. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 1984, 32, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Limper, M.; Eeftinck Schattenkerk, D.; de Kruif, M.D.; van Wissen, M.; Brandjes, D.P.; Duits, A.J.; van Gorp, E.C. One-year epidemiology of fever at the emergency department. Neth. J. Med. 2011, 69, 124–128. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Malmros, K.; Huttner, B.D.; McNulty, C.; Rodríguez-Baño, J.; Pulcini, C.; Tängdén, T. ESGAP UTI Working Group. Comparison of antibiotic treatment guidelines for urinary tract infections in 15 European countries-results of an online survey. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2019, 54, 478–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, K.; Hooton, T.M.; Naber, K.G.; Wullt, B.; Colgan, R.; Miller, L.G.; Moran, G.J.; Nicolle, L.E.; Raz, R.; Schaeffer, A.J.; et al. International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of acute uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis in women: A 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the European Society for Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2011, 52, e103–e120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- de Cueto, M.; Aliaga, L.; Alós, J.I.; Canut, A.; Los-Arcos, I.; Martínez, J.A.; Mensa, J.; Pintado, V.; Rodriguez-Pardo, D.; Yuste, J.R.; et al. Executive summary of the diagnosis and treatment of urinary tract infection: Guidelines of the Spanish Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (SEIMC). Enferm. Infecc. Microbiol. Clin. 2017, 35, 314–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Health Organization Global Antimicrobial Resistance and Use Surveillance System (GLASS). 2021. ISBN 978-92-4-002733-6. Available online: https://www.who.int/health-topics/antimicrobial-resistance (accessed on 31 December 2023).
- Mark, D.G.; Hung, Y.Y.; Salim, Z.; Tarlton, N.J.; Torres, E.; Frazee, B.W. Third-Generation Cephalosporin Resistance and Associated Discordant Antibiotic Treatment in Emergency Department Febrile Urinary Tract Infections. Ann. Emerg. Med. 2021, 78, 357–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shimoni, Z.; Froom, P. Ceftriaxone Usage and Resistance Rates in Internal Medicine Departments. Qeios 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kayaaslan, B.; Oktay, Z.; Hasanoglu, I.; Kalem, A.K.; Eser, F.; Ayhan, M.; Guner, R. Increasing rates of extended-spectrum B-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in uncomplicated and complicated acute pyelonephritis and evaluation of empirical treatments based on culture results. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2022, 41, 421–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tocut, M.; Zohar, I.; Schwartz, O.; Yossepowitch, O.; Maor, Y. Short- and long-term mortality in patients with urosepsis caused by Escherichia coli susceptible and resistant to 3rd generation cephalosporins. BMC Infect. Dis. 2022, 22, 571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eliakim-Raz, N.; Babitch, T.; Shaw, E.; Addy, I.; Wiegand, I.; Vank, C.; Torre-Vallejo, L.; Joan-Miquel, V.; Steve, M.; Grier, S.; et al. Risk factors for treatment failure and mortality among hospitalized patients with complicated urinary tract infection: A multicenter retrospective cohort study (RESCUING Study Group). Clin. Infect. Dis. 2019, 68, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shimoni, Z.; Cohen, R.; Avdiaev, R.; Froom, P. Treatment of febrile geriatric patients with suspected urinary tract infections in a hospital with high rates of ESBL producing bacteria: A cohort study. BMJ Open 2016, 6, e013696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shimoni, Z.; Salah, M.; Kasem, A.; Hermush, V.; Froom, P. Bacterial Resistance to Cephalosporin Treatment in Elderly Stable Patients Hospitalized with a Urinary Tract Infection. Am. J. Med. Sci. 2020, 360, 243–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shimoni, Z.; Froom, P.; Silke, B.; Benbassat, J. The presence of a urinary catheter is an important predictor of in-hospital mortality in internal medicine patients. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2022, 28, 1113–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nordenstam, G.; Sundh, V.; Lincoln, K.; Svanborg, A.; Edén, C.S. Bacteriuria in representative population samples of persons aged 72–79 years. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1989, 130, 1176–1186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shimoni, Z.; Avdiaev, R.; Froom, P. Urine cultures in hospitalized geriatric patients presenting with fever. Am. J. Med. Sci. 2017, 353, 17–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.S.; Kim, Y.; Chung, D.R. Impact of discordant empirical therapy on outcome of community-acquired bacteremic acute pyelonephritis. J. Infect. 2011, 62, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, S.; Song, D.Y.; Cho, S.H.; Kwon, K.T. Impact of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase on acute pyelonephritis treated with empirical ceftriaxone. Microb. Drug Resist. 2014, 20, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeon, J.H.; Kim, K.; Han, W.D.; Song, S.H.; Park, K.U.; Rhee, J.E.; Song, K.H.; Park, W.B.; Kim, E.S.; Park, S.W.; et al. Empirical use of ciprofloxacin for acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis caused by Escherichia coli in communities where the prevalence of fluoroquinolone resistance is high. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2012, 56, 3043–3046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babich, T.; Zusman, O.; Elbaz, M.; Ben-Zvi, H.; Paul, M.; Leibovici, L.; Avni, T. Empirical antibiotic treatment does not improve outcomes in catheter-associated urinary tract infection: Prospective cohort study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2017, 65, 1799–1805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiggers, J.B.; Sehgal, P.; Pinto, R.; MacFadden, D.; Daneman, N. The association of adequate empirical treatment and time to recovery from bacteraemic urinary tract infections: A retrospective cohort study. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2019, 25, 1253–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Esparcia, A.; Artero, A.; Eiros, J.M.; Balaguer, M.; Madrazo, M.; Alberola, J.; Nogueira, J.M. Influence of inadequate antimicrobial therapy on prognosis in elderly patients with severe urinary tract infections. Eur. J. Intern. Med. 2014, 25, 523–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwaber, M.J.; Navon-Venezia, S.; Kaye, K.S.; Ben-Ami, R.; Schwartz, D.; Carmeli, Y. Clinical and economic impact of bacteremia with extended- spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006, 50, 1257–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Gómez-Zorrilla, S.; Becerra-Aparicio, F.; López Montesinos, I.; Ruiz de Gopegui, E.; Grau, I.; Pintado, V.; Padilla, B.; Benito, N.; Boix-Palop, L.; Fariñas, M.C.; et al. A Large Multicenter Prospective Study of Community-Onset Healthcare Associated Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections in the Era of Multidrug Resistance: Even Worse than Hospital Acquired Infections? Infect. Dis. Ther. 2021, 10, 2677–2699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Froom, P.; Shimoni, Z. Laboratory Tests, Bacterial Resistance, and Treatment Options in Adult Patients Hospitalized with a Suspected Urinary Tract Infection. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woodford, H.J.; Graham, C.; Meda, M.; Miciuleviciene, J. Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infection in Hospitalized Older Patients-Are Any Currently Available Diagnostic Criteria Sensitive Enough? J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2011, 59, 567–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gbinigie, O.A.; Ordóñez-Mena, J.M.; Fanshawe, T.R.; Plüddemann, A.; Heneghan, C. Diagnostic Value of Symptoms and Signs for Identifying Urinary Tract Infection in Older Adult Outpatients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Infect. 2018, 77, 379–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barkham, T.M.; Martin, F.C.; Eykyn, S.J. Delay in the Diagnosis of Bacteraemic Urinary Tract Infection in Elderly Patients. Age Ageing 1996, 25, 130–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laborde, C.; Bador, J.; Hacquin, A.; Barben, J.; Putot, S.; Manckoundia, P.; Putot, A. Atypical Presentation of Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infection in Older Patients: Frequency and Prognostic Impact. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Komagamine, J.; Yabuki, T.; Noritomi, D.; Okabe, T. Prevalence of and factors associated with atypical presentation in bacteremic urinary tract infection. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 5197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Shimoni, Z.; Kasem, A.; Froom, P. The influence of mental status on reported local urinary tract symptoms in patients with bacteraemic urinary tract infections. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2021, 75, e13741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Timbrook, T.T.; Fowler, M.J. Predicting Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase and Carbapenem Resistance in Enterobacteriaceae Bacteremia: A Diagnostic Model Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Andrews, S.R.; Timbrook, T.T.; Fisher, M.A.; Tritle, B.J. Comparative analysis of a rapid diagnostic test and scoring tools for ESBL detection in Enterobacterales bloodstream infections for optimizing antimicrobial therapy. Microbiol. Spectr. 2024, 12, e03131-23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spellberg, B. The new antibiotic mantra-“Shorter Is Better. JAMA Intern. Med. 2016, 176, 1254–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Flaks-Manov, N.; Shadmi, E.; Hoshen, M.; Balicer, R.D. Health information exchange systems and length of stay in readmissions to a different hospital. J. Hosp. Med. 2016, 11, 401–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Variable | N = 180 Patients |
---|---|
Median (1st–3rd quartiles) | |
Age | 82 (73–87) |
Length of stay | 7 (5–10) |
Number (%) | |
Female gender | 98 (54.4) |
Permanent catheter | 29 (10.3) |
Not alert | 91 (50.6) |
Nursing home | 48 (26.7) |
History of UTI | 70 (38.9) |
Symptoms | Total N (%) | Fever N (%) |
---|---|---|
Dysuria | 28 (15.6) | 19 (67.9) |
Hematuria | 5 (2.8) | 4 (80.0) |
Abdominal pain | 12 (6.7) | 9 (75.0) |
Difficulty urinating | 11 (6.1) | 11 (100) |
Urgency | 1 (0.6) | 1 (100) |
Total urinary tract symptoms * | 57 (31.7) | 44 (77.2) |
Fever only | 46 (25.5) | 40 (87.0) |
Syncope/falls | 12 (6.7) | 5 (41.7) |
Nausea/vomiting | 8 (4.4) | 6 (75.0) |
Shortness of breath | 8 (4.4) | 4 (50.0) |
Hypotension | 4 (2.2) | 2 (50.0) |
General deterioration | 42 (23.3) | 34 (81.0) |
Transient ischemic attack | 3 (1.7) | 3 (100) |
Total | 180 | 148 (82.2) |
Variables * | None N = 123 | Yes N = 57 | Odds Ratio (95% CI) |
---|---|---|---|
SBP < 100 mmHg | 37 (30.1) | 10 (17.5) | 0.49 (0.23–1.08) |
Age 80 years or more | 73 (59.3) | 34 (59.6) | 1.01 (0.54–1.92) |
Females | 69 (56.1) | 29 (50.9) | 0.81 (0.43–1.52) |
Alert | 58 (47.2) | 31 (54.4) | 1.34 (0.71–2.51) |
Previous UTI | 45 (36.6) | 23 (40.4) | 1.12 (0.74–1.70) |
Fever | 49 (86.0) | 99 (80.5) | 1.48 (0.62–3.54) |
Hemoglobin <10 gm/dL | 31 (25.2) | 9 (15.8) | 0.56 (0.25–1.26) |
Albumin <3.5 g/dL | 55 (44.7) | 13 (22.8) | 0.37 (0.18–0.75) |
Creatinine ≥2 mg/dL | 34 (27.6) | 9 (15.8) | 0.49 (0.22–1.11) |
Permanent catheter | 15 (12.2) | 9 (15.8) | 1.35 (0.55–3.30) |
Urological diagnosis | 41 (33.3) | 25 (43.9) | 1.56 (0.82–2.97) |
Nursing home | 39 (31.7) | 9 (15.8) | 0.40 (0.18–0.90) |
Bacteria | Total N (%) | ESBL N (%) |
---|---|---|
Escherichia coli | 127 (70.6) | 44 (34.6) |
Klebsiella species | 21 (11.7) | 13 (61.9) |
Proteus species | 16 (8.9) | 5 (31.3) |
Pseudomonas species | 5 (2.8) | 2 (40.0) |
Citrobacter species | 3 (1.7) | 1 (33.3) |
Providencia species | 3 (1.7) | 2 (66.7) |
Staphylococcus aureus | 3 (1.7) | 0 (0.0) |
Enterococcus faecalis | 1 (0.6) | 1 (100) |
Enterobacter cloaca | 1 (0.6) | 0 (0.0) |
Total | 180 | 68 (37.8) |
Antibiotics | Ceftriaxone N = 125 n (%) | Other N = 55 n (%) | Total N = 180 n (%) |
---|---|---|---|
No change | 83 (66.4) | 23 (52.7) | 106 (58.9) |
BRIAT * | 36 (28.8) | 16 (29.1) | 52 (28.9) |
De-escalation | 0 (0.0) | 13 (23.6) | 13 (12.8) |
No response | 2 (1.6) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (1.1) |
Unclear | 3 (2.4) | 3 (5.5) | 6 (3.3) |
Allergy | 1 (0.8) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.6) |
Variables ** | Ceftriaxone N = 125 | Other N = 55 | Odds Ratio (95% CI) * |
---|---|---|---|
Age ≥ 80 years | 78 (62.4) | 29 (52.7) | 1.49 (0.78–2.82) |
Female | 74 (59.2) | 24 (43.6) | 1.87 (0.99–3.56) |
Previous UTI | 37 (29.6) | 31 (56.4) | 0.33 (0.17–0.63) |
Uropathology | 35 (28.0) | 31 (56.4) | 0.30 (0.16–0.58) |
Fever | 105 (84.0) | 43 (78.2) | 1.47 (0.66–3.26) |
UT symptoms | 47 (37.6) | 10 (18.2) | 2.71 (1.25–5.88) |
Previous UTI | 37 (29.6) | 31 (56.4) | 0.33 (0.17–0.63) |
Nursing home | 33 (26.4) | 15 (27.3) | 0.96 (0.47–1.95) |
Hypotension | 32 (25.6) | 15 (27.3) | 0.92 (0.45–1.88) |
BRIAT | 38 (30.4) | 16 (29.1) | 1.06 (0.53–2.13) |
ESBL | 35 (28.0) | 33 (60.0) | 0.26 (0.13–0.50) |
Death | 3 (3.2) | 1 (5.5) | 0.88 (0.58–1.34) |
LOS * ≥ 10 days | 28 (22.4) | 17 (30.9) | 0.65 (0.32–1.31) |
BRIAT-yes | 18/38 (47.4) | 7/16 (43.8) | |
BRIAT-no | 10/87 (11.5) | 10/39 (25.6) | |
Odds ratios | 6.9 (2.8–17.3) | 2.3 (0.7–7.6) |
Laboratory Tests * | Ceftriaxone n = 125 | Other n = 55 | Odds Ratio (95% CI) * | |
---|---|---|---|---|
WBC (109 cells/L) | <12 12–14.9 ≥15 | 57 (46.6) 30 (24.0) 38 (30.4) | 28 (50.9) 10 (18.2) 17 (30.9) | 1.07 (0.74–1.54) |
HB (gm/dL) | ≥12 10–11.9 <10 | 62 (49.6) 41 (32.8) 22 (17.6) | 20 (36.4) 17 (30.9) 18 (32.7) | 1.64 (0.43–0.95) |
Platelets (109/L) | <100 | 6 (4.8) | 3 (5.5) | 0.87 (0.21–3.64) |
CRP (mg/dL) | <10 10–99 100–199 ≥200 | 5 (4.0) 50 (40.0) 38 (30.4) 32 (25.6) | 4 (7.3) 23 (41.8) 17 (30.9) 11 (20.0) | 1.20 (0.83–1.73) |
LDH (U/L) | <400 400–599 ≥600 | 54 (43.2) 50 (40.0) 21 (16.8) | 23 (41.8) 24 (43.6) 8 (14.5) | 1.02 (0.65–1.58) |
Albumin (gm/dL) | ≥3.5 3.0–3.49 <3.0 | 84 (67.2) 24 (19.2) 17 (13.6) | 28 (50.9) 16 (29.1) 11 (20.0) | 0.68 (0.45–1.02) |
Bilirubin (mg/dL) | ≥1.2 | 19 (15.2) | 3 (5.5) | 3.11 (0.88–10.97) |
Creatinine (mg/dL) | ≥2.0 | 28 (22.4) | 15 (27.3) | 0.77 (0.37–1.59) |
BUN (mg/dL) | <20 20–29 ≥30 | 26 (20.8) 37 (29.6) 62 (49.6) | 11 (20.0) 16 (29.1) 28 (50.9) | 0.97 (0.65–1.45) |
Glucose (mg/dL) | <150 150–199 ≥200 | 78 (62.4) 30 (24.0) 17 (13.6) | 40 (72.7) 9 (16.4) 6 (10.9) | 1.31 (0.82–2.10) |
Case | Age/Sex * | Organism | Changed to | Days |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ceftriaxone initial treatment | ||||
1 | 81F | E-coli-ESBL | Piperacillin/ tazobactam | 19 |
2 | 63F | E coli-ESBL | Piperacillin/ tazobactam | 11 |
3 | 99F | Citrobacter-ESBL | Ertapenem | 7 |
4 | 94M | Staph aureus **** | none | 1 |
Other antibiotics | ||||
5 | 69F | E coli-ESBL ** | 7 | |
6 | 88M | E coli *** | Ceftriaxone | 5 |
Variables | ESBL + N = 68 | Other N = 112 | Odds Ratio |
---|---|---|---|
Age ≥ 80 years | 39 (57.4) | 68 (60.7) | 0.87 (0.47–1.60) |
Female | 36 (52.9) | 62 (55.4) | 0.91 (0.50–1.66) |
Nursing home | 20 (29.4) | 28 (25.0) | 1.25 (0.64–2.45) |
Hospitalization <90 days before | 13 (19.1) | 12 (10.7) | 1.97 (0.84–4.61) |
Uropathology | 28 (41.2) | 38 (33.9) | 1.36 (0.73–2.54) |
Urethral catheter | 12 (17.6) | 12 (10.7) | 1.79 (0.75–4.24) |
Previous UTI | 36 (52.9) | 32 (28.6) | 2.81 (1.50–5.27) |
Hemoglobin <10 gm/dL | 25 (36.8) | 15 (13.4) | 3.76 (1.81–7.83) |
Albumin <3 gm/dL | 17 (25.0) | 11 (9.8) | 3.06 (1.33–7.02) |
BUN ≥30 mg/dL | 43 (63.2) | 47 (42.0) | 2.38 (1.28–4.42) |
Creatinine ≥ 2 mg/dL | 20 (29.4) | 23 (20.5) | 1.61 (0.81–3.23) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Shimoni, Z.; Salama, H.; Finn, T.; Froom, P. Is It Safe to Treat Stable Patients with Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections with High-Resistant-Rate Antibiotics? Diagnostics 2024, 14, 1620. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14151620
Shimoni Z, Salama H, Finn T, Froom P. Is It Safe to Treat Stable Patients with Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections with High-Resistant-Rate Antibiotics? Diagnostics. 2024; 14(15):1620. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14151620
Chicago/Turabian StyleShimoni, Zvi, Hanna Salama, Talya Finn, and Paul Froom. 2024. "Is It Safe to Treat Stable Patients with Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections with High-Resistant-Rate Antibiotics?" Diagnostics 14, no. 15: 1620. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14151620
APA StyleShimoni, Z., Salama, H., Finn, T., & Froom, P. (2024). Is It Safe to Treat Stable Patients with Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections with High-Resistant-Rate Antibiotics? Diagnostics, 14(15), 1620. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14151620