Background:As the use of colistin to treat carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative infections increases, colistin resistance is being increasingly reported in Indian hospitals.Materials and Methods:Retrospective chart review of clinical data from patients with colistin-resistant isolates (minimum inhibitory concentration >2 mcg/ml). Clinical profile, outcome, and antibiotics that were used for treatment were analyzed.Results:Twenty-four colistin-resistant isolates were reported over 18 months (January 2014-June 2015). A history of previous hospitalization within 3 months was present in all the patients. An invasive device was used in 22 (91.67%) patients. Urine was the most common source of the isolate, followed by blood and respiratory samples. Klebsiella pneumoniae constituted 87.5% of all isolates. Sixteen (66.6%) were considered to have true infection, whereas eight (33.3%) were considered to represent colonization. Susceptibility of these isolates to other drugs tested was tigecycline in 75%, chloramphenicol 62.5%, amikacin 29.17%, co-trimoxazole 12.5%, and fosfomycin (sensitive in all 4 isolates tested). Antibiotics that were used for treatment were combinations among the following antimicrobials-tigecycline, chloramphenicol, fosfomycin, amikacin, ciprofloxacin, co-trimoxazole, and sulbactam. Among eight patients who were considered to have colonization, there were no deaths. Bacteremic patients had a significantly higher risk of death compared to all nonbacteremic patients (P = 0.014).Conclusions:Colistin resistance among Gram-negative bacteria, especially K. pneumoniae, is emerging in Indian hospitals. At least one-third of isolates represented colonization only rather than true infection and did not require treatment. Among patients with true infection, only 25% had a satisfactory outcome and survived to discharge. Fosfomycin, tigecycline, and chloramphenicol may be options for combination therapy.

Introduction: De-escalation is the key to balance judicious antibiotic usage for life-threatening infections and reducing the emergence of antibiotic resistance caused by antibiotic overuse. Robust evidence is lacking regarding the safety of antibiotic de-escalation in culture negative sepsis.Materials and Methods: Children admitted to the PICU during the first 6 months of 2019 with suspected infection were included. Based on the clinical condition, cultures and septic markers, antibiotics were de-escalated or continued at 48–72 h. Outcome data like worsening of primary infection, acquisition of hospital acquired infection, level of ICU support and mortality were captured.Results: Among the 360 admissions, 247 (68.6%) children received antibiotics. After excluding 92 children, 155 children with 162 episodes of sepsis were included in the study. Thirty four episodes were not eligible for de-escalation. Among the eligible group of 128 episodes, antibiotics were de-escalated in 95 (74.2%) and continued in 33 (25.8%). The primary infection worsened in 5 (5.2%) children in the de-escalation group and in 1 (3%) in non de-escalation group [Hazard ratio: 2.12 (95%CI: 0.39–11.46)]. There were no significant differences in rates of hospital acquired infection, mortality or length of ICU stay amongst the groups. Blood cultures and assessment of clinical recovery played a major role in de-escalation of antibiotics and the clinician's hesitation to de-escalate in critically ill culture negative children was the main reason for not de-escalating among eligible children.Conclusion: Antibiotic de-escalation appears to be a safe strategy to apply in criticallly ill children, even in those with negative cultures.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract