English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background The ideal therapy for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSI) due to ESBL-producing organisms is widely debated. Although prior studies have demonstrated efficacy of non-carbapenems (CBPNs) for ESBL infections, results from the MERINO study group found increased mortality associated with piperacillin/tazobactam (PT) when compared with meropenem for treatment of ESBL BSI. The goal of this study was to investigate patient outcomes associated with the use of CBPN-sparing therapies (PT and cefepime (CEF)) for ESBL BSI. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality between non-CBPN (PT and CEF) and CBPN groups. Secondary outcomes included clinical cure, microbiologic cure, infection recurrence, and development of resistance. Methods This was a retrospective observational study of patients admitted to the hospital from May 2016 - May 2019 with a positive blood culture for an ESBL-producing organism. Patients receiving meropenem, ertapenem, PT, or CEF were included. Patients were excluded if &amp;lt; 18 years old, receiving antibiotics for &amp;lt; 24 hours, treated for a polymicrobial BSI, or receiving concomitant antibiotic therapy for another gram-negative (non-ESBL) infection. Results One hundred and fourteen patients were analyzed; 74 (65%) patients received CBPN therapy compared with 40 (35%) patients that received a non-CBPN (CEF N=30, PT N=10). There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 6% (N=7). Eight percent of patients (N=6) in the CBPN arm died compared to 3% (N=1) of patients in the non-CBPN arm, P = 0.42. No difference in mortality was detected between groups when evaluating subgroups with Pitt bacteremia score ≥4 (N=25), requiring ICU admission (N=50), non-genitourinary source (N=50), or by causative organism (N=76 E. coli; N=38 Klebsiella spp.). There was no difference between groups for secondary outcomes. Conclusion CEF and PT are reasonable options for the treatment of ESBL BSI and did not result in increased mortality or decreased clinical efficacy when compared to CBPNs in this cohort. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

open forum infectious diseases

1576. Re-Evaluation of cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam to Decrease Use of Carbapenems in ESBL-Producing <i>Enterobacterales</i> BloodStream Infections (REDUCE-BSI)

1576. Re-Evaluation of cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam to Decrease Use of Carbapenems in ESBL-Producing Enterobacterales BloodStream Infections (REDUCE-BSI)