Current evidence on hospital antimicrobial stewardship objectives: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship is advocated to improve the quality of antimicrobial use. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether antimicrobial stewardship objectives had any effects in hospitals and long-term care facilities on four predefined patients' outcomes: clinical outcomes, adverse events, costs, and bacterial resistance rates. METHODS: We identified 14 stewardship objectives and did a separate systematic search for articles relating to each one in Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and PubMed. Studies were included if they reported data on any of the four predefined outcomes in patients in whom the specific antimicrobial stewardship objective was assessed and compared the findings in patients in whom the objective was or was not met. We used a random-effects model to calculate relative risk reductions with relative risks and 95% CIs. FINDINGS: We identified 145 unique studies with data on nine stewardship objectives. Overall, the quality of evidence was generally low and heterogeneity between studies was mostly moderate to high. For the objectives empirical therapy according to guidelines, de-escalation of therapy, switch from intravenous to oral treatment, therapeutic drug monitoring, use of a list of restricted antibiotics, and bedside consultation the overall evidence showed significant benefits for one or more of the four outcomes. Guideline-adherent empirical therapy was associated with a relative risk reduction for mortality of 35% (relative risk 0·65, 95% CI 0·54-0·80, p<0·0001) and for de-escalation of 56% (0·44, 0·30-0·66, p<0·0001). Evidence of effects was less clear for adjusting therapy according to renal function, discontinuing therapy based on lack of clinical or microbiological evidence of infection, and having a local antibiotic guide. We found no reports for the remaining five stewardship objectives or for long-term care facilities. INTERPRETATION: Our findings of beneficial effects on outcomes with nine antimicrobial stewardship objectives suggest they can guide stewardship teams in their efforts to improve the quality of antibiotic use in hospitals. FUNDING: Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy and Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment.

The Effect of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Surgery in Morbidly Obese Patients on Pharmacokinetics of (Acetyl)Salicylic Acid and Omeprazole: the ERY-PAO Study.

BACKGROUND: Data on the absorption of orally administered drugs following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery in obese patients are limited and inconclusive. As it is difficult to predict changes in absorption, studies on frequently used drugs in this population are necessary. Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and omeprazole are two commonly prescribed drugs in obese patients. METHODS: In this repeated measures study, omeprazole and salicylic acid (SA) serum concentrations were measured before and after RYGB in 34 morbidly obese subjects. Time to maximum concentration (Tmax), lag time (Tlag), maximum concentration (Cmax), and area under the serum concentration versus time curve (AUC) were calculated for both drugs to determine possible differences in drug absorption after the procedure. RESULTS: For SA, Tmax significantly decreased after RYGB, while both Cmax and AUC0-24 significantly increased. For omeprazole, both Tmax and Tlag significantly decreased after RYGB, while Cmax significantly increased. Mean AUC0-12 significantly decreased post-surgery. The difference in AUC0-12 before and after surgery varied between subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows a faster absorption of both ASA and omeprazole after RYGB. The exposure to ASA is higher post-surgery, but the standard dose of 80 mg does not need to be modified, considering its range in effective dose. The exposure to omeprazole is, on average, decreased after surgery. Clinicians should be aware to increase the dose of omeprazole if symptoms suggest inadequate response.