Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T06:48:33.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Risk Factors and Outcomes Associated with Isolation of Meropenem High-Level-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Kathryn J. Eagye ,
Joseph L. Kuti  and
David P. Nicolau
Kathryn J. Eagye
Affiliation:
Center for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT
Joseph L. Kuti
Affiliation:
Center for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT
David P. Nicolau*
Affiliation:
Center for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT Division of Infectious Diseases, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT
*
Center for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, 80 Seymour Street, Hartford, CT 06102 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To determine risk factors and outcomes for patients with meropenem high–level-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MRPA) (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] ≥ 32 μg/mL).

Design.

Case-control-control.

Setting.

An 867-bed urban, teaching hospital.

Patients.

Fifty-eight MRPA case patients identified from an earlier P. aeruginosa study; 125 randomly selected control patients with meropenem-susceptible P. aeruginosa (MSPA) (MIC ≤ 4 μg/mL), and 57 control patients without P. aeruginosa (sampled by case date/location).

Methods.

Patient data, outcomes, and costs were obtained via administrative database. Cases were compared to each control group while controlling for time at risk (days between admission and culture, or entire length of stay [LOS] for patients without P. aeruginosa).

Results.

A multivariable model predicted risks for MRPA versus MSPA (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]): more admissions (in the prior 12 months) (1.41 [1.15, 1.74]), congestive heart failure (2.19 [1.03, 4.68]), and Foley catheter (2.53 [1.18, 5.45]) (adj. R2 = 0.28). For MRPA versus no P. aeruginosa, risks were age (in 5-year increments) (1.17 [1.03, 1.33]), more prior admissions (1.40 [1.08, 1.81]), and more days in the intensive care unit (1.10 [1.03, 1.18]) (adj. R2 = 0.32). Other invasive devices (including mechanical ventilation) and previous antibiotic use (including carbapenems) were nonsignificant. MRPA mortality (31%) did not differ from that of MSPA (15%) when adjusted for time at risk (P = .15) but did from mortality without P. aeruginosa (9%) (P = .01 ). Median LOS and costs were greater for MRPA patients versus MSPA patients and patients without P. aeruginosa: 30 days versus 16 and 10 (P < .01 ) and $88,425 versus $28,620 and $22,605 (P <.01).

Conclusions.

Although antibiotic use has been shown to promote resistance, our data found that prior antibiotic use was not associated with MRPA acquisition. However, admission frequency and Foley catheters were, suggesting that infection control measures are essential to reducing MRPA transmission.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 30 , Issue 8 , August 2009 , pp. 746 - 752
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Gaynes, R, Edwards, JR. Overview of nosocomial infections caused by gram-negative bacilli. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:848–854.Google Scholar
2.Jones, RN. Resistance patterns among nosocomial pathogens: trends over the past few years. Chest 2001;119(Suppl 2):397S–404S.Google Scholar
3.Fluit, AC, Jones, ME, Schmitz, FJ, Acar, J, Gupta, R, Verhoef, J. Antimicrobial susceptibility and frequency of occurrence of clinical blood isolates in Europe from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program, 1997 and 1998. Clin Infect Dis 2000;30:454–460.Google Scholar
4.Livermore, DM. Of Pseudomonas, porins, pumps and carbapenems. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001;47:247–250.Google Scholar
5.El Amin, N, Giske, CG, Jalai, S, Keijser, B, Kronvall, G, Wretlind, B. Car-bapenem resistance mechanisms in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: alterations of porin OprD and efflux proteins do not fully explain resistance patterns observed in clinical isolates. APMIS 2005;113:187–196.Google Scholar
6.Rossolini, GM, Mantengoli, E. Treatment and control of severe infections caused by multiresistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005;11(Suppl 4):17–32.Google Scholar
7.Trouillet, JL, Chastre, J, Vuagnat, A, et al.Ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by potentially drug-resistant bacteria. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:531–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Wiener, J, Quinn, JP, Bradford, PA, et al.Multiple antibiotic-resistant Klebsiella and Escherichia coli in nursing homes. JAMA 1999;281:517–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Kollef, MH, Fraser, VJ. Antibiotic resistance in the intensive care unit. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:298–314.Google Scholar
10.Richards, MJ, Edwards, JR, Culver, DH, Gaynes, RP. Nosocomial infections in medical intensive care units in the United States: National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Crit Care Med 1999;27:887–892.Google Scholar
11.Schwaber, MJ, Klarfeld-Lidji, S, Navon-Venezia, S, Schwartz, D, Leavitt, A, Carmeli, Y. Predictors of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae acquisition among hospitalized adults and effect of acquisition on mortality. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008;52:1028–1033.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Harris, AD, Smith, D, Johnson, JA, Bradham, DD, Roghmann, MC. Risk factors for imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:340–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Lautenbach, E, Weiner, MG, Nachamkin, I, Bilker, WB, Sheridan, A, Fish-man, NO. Imipenem resistance among Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates: risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on clinical and economic outcomes. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:893–900.Google Scholar
14.Santos Filho, L, Eagye, KJ, Kuti, JL, Nicolau, DP. Addressing resistance evolution in Pseudomonas aeruginosa using pharmacodynamic modelling: application to meropenem dosage and combination therapy. Clin Microbiol Infect 2007;13:579–585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Kaye, KS, Engemann, JJ, Mozaffari, E, Carmeli, Y. Reference group choice and antibiotic resistance outcomes. Emerg Infect Dis 2004;10:1125–1128.Google Scholar