Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 11(5): 372-80, 2011 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21420908

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previously, we assessed selective digestive tract decontamination (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) on survival and prevention of bacteraemia in patients in intensive-care units. In this analysis, we aimed to assess effectiveness of these interventions for prevention of respiratory tract colonisation and bacteraemia with highly resistant microorganisms acquired in intensive-care units. METHODS: We did an open-label, clustered group-randomised, crossover study in 13 intensive-care units in the Netherlands between May, 2004, and July, 2006. Participants admitted to intensive-care units with an expected duration of mechanical ventilation of more than 48 h or an expected stay of more than 72 h received SOD (topical tobramycin, colistin, and amphotericin B in the oropharynx), SDD (SOD antibiotics in the oropharynx and stomach plus 4 days' intravenous cefotaxime), or standard care. The computer-randomised order of study regimens was applied by an independent clinical pharmacist who was masked to intensive-care-unit identity. We calculated crude odds ratios (95% CI) for rates of bacteraemia or respiratory tract colonisation with highly resistant microorganisms in patients who stayed in intensive-care units for more than 3 days (ie, acquired infection). This trial is registered at http://isrctn.org, number ISRCTN35176830. FINDINGS: Data were available for 5927 (>99%) of 5939 patients, of whom 5463 (92%) were in intensive-care units for more than 3 days. 239 (13%) of 1837 patients in standard care acquired bacteraemia after 3 days, compared with 158 (9%) of 1758 in SOD (odds ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·53-0·82), and 124 (7%) of 1868 in SDD (0·48, 0·38-0·60). Eight patients acquired bacteraemia with highly resistant microorganisms during SDD, compared with 18 patients (with 19 episodes) during standard care (0·41, 0·18-0·94; rate reduction [RR] 59%, absolute risk reduction [ARR] 0·6%) and 20 during SOD (0·37, 0·16-0·85; RR 63%, ARR 0·7%). Of the patients staying in intensive-care units for more than 3 days, we obtained endotracheal aspirate cultures for 881 (49%) patients receiving standard care, 886 (50%) receiving SOD, and 828 (44%) receiving SDD. 128 (15%) patients acquired respiratory tract colonisation with highly resistant microorganisms during standard care, compared with 74 (8%) during SDD (0·58, 0·43-0·78; RR 38%, ARR 5·5%) and 88 (10%) during SOD (0·65, 0·49-0·87; RR 32%, ARR 4·6%). Acquired respiratory tract colonisation with Gram-negative bacteria or cefotaxime-resistant and colistin-resistant pathogens was lowest during SDD. INTERPRETATION: Widespread use of SDD and SOD in intensive-care units with low levels of antibiotic resistance is justified. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Antifungal Agents/pharmacology , Decontamination/methods , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Gastrointestinal Tract/microbiology , Oropharynx/microbiology , Bacteria/drug effects , Cross-Over Studies , Drug Resistance, Fungal , Humans , Intensive Care Units
2.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 181(5): 452-7, 2010 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19965807

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Selective digestive tract decontamination (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) eradicate gram-negative bacteria (GNB) from the intestinal and respiratory tract in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but their effect on antibiotic resistance remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: We quantified the effects of SDD and SOD on bacterial ecology in 13 ICUs that participated in a study, in which SDD, SOD, or standard care was used during consecutive periods of 6 months (de Smet AM, Kluytmans JA, Cooper BS, Mascini EM, Benus RF, van der Werf TS, van der Hoeven JG, Pickkers P, Bogaers-Hofman D, van der Meer NJ, et al. N Engl J Med 2009;360:20-31). METHODS: Point prevalence surveys of rectal and respiratory samples were performed once monthly in all ICU patients (receiving or not receiving SOD/SDD). Effects of SDD on rectal, and of SDD/SOD on respiratory tract, carriage of GNB were determined by comparing results from consecutive point prevalence surveys during intervention (6 mo for SDD and 12 mo for SDD/SOD) with consecutive point prevalence data in the pre- and postintervention periods. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: During SDD, average proportions of patients with intestinal colonization with GNB resistant to either ceftazidime, tobramycin, or ciprofloxacin were 5, 7, and 7%, and increased to 15, 13, and 13% postintervention (P < 0.05). During SDD/SOD resistance levels in the respiratory tract were not more than 6% for all three antibiotics but increased gradually (for ceftazidime; P < 0.05 for trend) during intervention and to levels of 10% or more for all three antibiotics postintervention (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SOD and SDD have marked effects on the bacterial ecology in an ICU, with rising ceftazidime resistance prevalence rates in the respiratory tract during intervention and a considerable rebound effect of ceftazidime resistance in the intestinal tract after discontinuation of SDD.


Subject(s)
Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Drug Resistance, Bacterial/drug effects , Gram-Negative Bacteria/drug effects , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/prevention & control , Intensive Care Units , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/adverse effects , Ceftazidime/therapeutic use , Ciprofloxacin/therapeutic use , Cross Infection/drug therapy , Cross Infection/microbiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Rectum/microbiology , Respiratory System/microbiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , Respiratory Tract Infections/microbiology , Tobramycin/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL