Background Bloodstream infections (BSI) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. The IOAS (Improving Outcomes and Antimicrobial Stewardship) study seeks to evaluate the impact of the Accelerate PhenoTest® BC Kit (AXDX) on antimicrobial use and clinical outcomes in BSIs. Methods This multicenter, quasi-experimental study compared clinical and antimicrobial stewardship metrics, prior to and after implementation of AXDX testing, to evaluate the impact this technology has on patients with BSI. Laboratory and clinical data from hospitalized patients with BSI (excluding contaminants) were compared between two arms, one that underwent testing on AXDX (post-AXDX) and one that underwent alternative organism identification and susceptibility testing (pre-AXDX). The primary outcomes were time to optimal therapy (TTOT) within 96 hours of blood culture positivity and 30-day mortality. Results A total of 854 patients with BSI (435 pre-AXDX, 419 post-AXDX) were included. Median TTOT was 17.2 hours shorter in the post-AXDX arm (23.7 hours) compared to the pre-AXDX arm (40.9 hours; P<0.0001). Compared with pre-AXDX, median time to first antimicrobial modification (24.2 versus 13.9 hours; P<0.0001) and first antimicrobial de-escalation (36.0 versus 27.2 hours; P=0.0004) were shorter in the post-AXDX arm. Mortality (8.7% pre-AXDX versus 6.0% post-AXDX), length of stay (7.0 pre-AXDX versus 6.5 days post-AXDX), and adverse drug events were not significantly different between arms. Length of stay was shorter in the post-AXDX arm (5.4 versus 6.4 days; P=0.03) among patients with Gram-negative bacteremia. Conclusions For BSIs, use of AXDX was associated with significant decreases in TTOT, first antimicrobial modification, and time to antimicrobial de-escalation.

Patients admitted from the community with a suspected central nervous system (CNS) infection require prompt diagnostic evaluation and correct antimicrobial treatment. A retrospective, multicenter, pre/post intervention study was performed to evaluate the impact that the BioFire® FilmArray® meningitis/encephalitis (ME) panel run in-house had on the clinical management of adult patients admitted from the community with a lumbar puncture (LP) performed for a suspected CNS infection. The primary outcome was the effect that this intervention had on herpes simplex virus (HSV) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) turnaround time (TAT). Secondary outcomes included the effect that this intervention had on antiviral days of therapy (DOT), total antimicrobial DOT, and hospital length of stay (LOS). A total of 81 and 79 patients were included in the pre-intervention and post-intervention cohorts, respectively. The median HSV PCR TAT was significantly longer in the pre-intervention group (85 vs. 4.1 h, p < 0.001). Total antiviral DOT was significantly greater in the pre-intervention group (3 vs. 1, p < 0.001), as was total antimicrobial DOT (7 vs. 5, p < 0.001). Pre-intervention hospital LOS was also significantly longer (6.6 vs. 4.4 days, p = 0.02). Implementing the ME panel in-house for adults undergoing an LP for a suspected community-onset CNS infection significantly reduced the HSV PCR TAT, antiviral DOT, total antimicrobial DOT, and hospital LOS.

BackgroundCefazolin and ceftriaxone are frequently used to treat methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia, especially in the realm of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. Both antimicrobials have been associated with favorable clinical outcomes for mixed MSSA infections. However, limited published data exist specifically comparing the use of these agents for the treatment of MSSA bacteremia.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of Veteran patients with MSSA bacteremia who received ≥14 days of cefazolin or ceftriaxone between 2009 and 2014. Rates of treatment failure were compared between both groups. Treatment failure was defined as therapy extension, incomplete therapy, unplanned oral suppressive therapy, relapse of infection, or hospital admission or surgery within 90 days.ResultsOut of 71 patients, 38 received treatment with cefazolin and 33 with ceftriaxone. The overall rate of treatment failure was 40.8%, with significantly more failures among patients receiving ceftriaxone (54.5% versus 28.9%; P = .029). Factors associated with treatment failure included longer duration of parenteral therapy, heart failure, and treatment in an external skilled nursing facility as compared with treatment in the Department of Veterans Affairs attached Community Living Center.ConclusionsCeftriaxone had a higher rate of treatment failure than cefazolin for the treatment of MSSA bacteremia in a Veteran population. Potential reasons for this could include the higher protein binding of ceftriaxone, ultimately resulting in lower serum concentrations of free drug, or other unknown factors. Further studies are warranted to confirm these results.