RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial usage and stewardship programmes during COVID-19 have been poorly studied. Prescribing practice varies despite national guidelines, and there is concern that stewardship principles have suffered. AIM: To analyse antibiotic prescriptions during the COVID-19 pandemic at a teaching hospital and to propose improved approaches to stewardship. METHODS: We reviewed COVID-19 admissions to medical wards and intensive care units (ICUs) in a London teaching hospital to assess initial antibiotic usage and evidence of bacterial co-infection, and to determine if our current antibiotic guidelines were adhered to. FINDINGS: Data from 130 inpatients (76% medical and 24% ICU) were obtained. On admission, 90% were treated with antibiotics. No microbiological samples taken on admission provided definitive evidence of respiratory co-infection. In 13% of cases, antibiotics were escalated, usually without supporting clinical, radiological or laboratory evidence. In 16% of cases, antibiotics were stopped or de-escalated within 72 h. Blood results and chest radiographs were characteristic of COVID-19 in 20% of ward patients and 42% of ICU patients. Overall mortality was 25% at 14 days - similar to rates described for the UK as a whole. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients received antibiotics despite limited evidence of co-infection. Most patients received narrower spectrum antibiotics than recommended by NICE. As understanding of the natural history of COVID-19 infections progresses, stewardship programmes will need to evolve; however, at this point, we feel that a more restrictive antibiotic prescribing approach is warranted. We propose strategies for effective stewardship and estimate the effect this may have on antibiotic consumption.
RESUMO
Triazoles remain first-line agents for antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk haemato-oncology patients, but their use is increasingly contraindicated due to drug-drug interactions and additive toxicities with novel treatments. In this retrospective, single-centre, observational study, we present our eight-year experience of antifungal prophylaxis using intermittent high-dose liposomal Amphotericin B (L-AmB). All adults identified through our Antifungal Stewardship Programme as receiving L-AmB prophylaxis at 7.5 mg/kg once-weekly between February 2012 and January 2020 were included. Adverse reactions, including infusion reactions, electrolyte loss, and nephrotoxicity, were recorded. 'Breakthrough' invasive fungal infection (IFI) occurring within four weeks of L-AmB was classified using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) criteria. Moreover, 114 courses of intermittent high-dose L-AmB prophylaxis administered to 92 unique patients were analysed. Hypokalaemia was the most common grade 3-4 adverse event, with 26 (23%) courses. Grade 3 nephrotoxicity occurred in 8 (7%) and reversed in all six patients surviving to 90 days. There were two (1.8%) episodes of breakthrough IFI, one 'probable' and one 'possible'. In this study, the largest evaluation of intermittent high-dose L-AmB prophylaxis conducted to date, toxicity was manageable and reversible and breakthrough IFI was rare. L-AmB prophylaxis represents a viable alternative for patients with a contraindication to triazoles.
