Dayana dos Santos Oliveira , Julia Vitória da Rocha , Juliano Gasparetto , Carolina Hikari Yamada , Joao Paulo Telles , Felipe Francisco Tuon
{"title":"Enteral versus intravenous antibiotics for critically ill patients: A pilot study","authors":"Dayana dos Santos Oliveira , Julia Vitória da Rocha , Juliano Gasparetto , Carolina Hikari Yamada , Joao Paulo Telles , Felipe Francisco Tuon","doi":"10.1016/j.bjid.2025.104538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>While there are valid concerns regarding the use of Enteral Antibiotics (EN) in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), the evidence opposing this practice has not been thoroughly evaluated in prior research.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate the transition from sequential Intravenous (IV) antibiotics to EN antibiotics in critically ill patients with infections.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, unblinded clinical trial involving patients with infections who received antibiotic therapy. The study compared sequential IV antibiotic treatment to EN therapy in patients who continued standard IV therapy in the intensive care unit. Primary outcome measures included mortality and clinical improvement assessed on days 3, 5, and 10. Secondary outcomes encompassed hospital and ICU length of stay, costs, and evaluation of microbiological failure.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of67 patients were included in the EN group and 60 patients in the IV group. Most patients were classified as infected (66.1 %), with 33.1 % diagnosed with sepsis. In-hospital mortality rates were comparable between the two groups, with 31 % in the EN group and 30 % in the IV group. Clinical outcomes assessed on days 3, 5, and 10 showed no significant differences between the groups. Among the 67 patients in the EN group, 7 (10.5 %) required a return to intravenous antibiotic therapy. Notably, drug costs in the IV group increased by 207 %.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This is the first controlled and randomized study to evaluate the oral/enteral route of antibiotic administration in the ICU. The findings indicate no significant differences in clinical outcomes or survival rates between the two groups, while demonstrating reduced costs and comparable safety with EN antibiotics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56327,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":"29 4","pages":"Article 104538"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1413867025000418","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
While there are valid concerns regarding the use of Enteral Antibiotics (EN) in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), the evidence opposing this practice has not been thoroughly evaluated in prior research.
Aim
This study aimed to evaluate the transition from sequential Intravenous (IV) antibiotics to EN antibiotics in critically ill patients with infections.
Methods
This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, unblinded clinical trial involving patients with infections who received antibiotic therapy. The study compared sequential IV antibiotic treatment to EN therapy in patients who continued standard IV therapy in the intensive care unit. Primary outcome measures included mortality and clinical improvement assessed on days 3, 5, and 10. Secondary outcomes encompassed hospital and ICU length of stay, costs, and evaluation of microbiological failure.
Results
A total of67 patients were included in the EN group and 60 patients in the IV group. Most patients were classified as infected (66.1 %), with 33.1 % diagnosed with sepsis. In-hospital mortality rates were comparable between the two groups, with 31 % in the EN group and 30 % in the IV group. Clinical outcomes assessed on days 3, 5, and 10 showed no significant differences between the groups. Among the 67 patients in the EN group, 7 (10.5 %) required a return to intravenous antibiotic therapy. Notably, drug costs in the IV group increased by 207 %.
Conclusion
This is the first controlled and randomized study to evaluate the oral/enteral route of antibiotic administration in the ICU. The findings indicate no significant differences in clinical outcomes or survival rates between the two groups, while demonstrating reduced costs and comparable safety with EN antibiotics.
期刊介绍:
The Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases is the official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI). It aims to publish relevant articles in the broadest sense on all aspects of microbiology, infectious diseases and immune response to infectious agents.
The BJID is a bimonthly publication and one of the most influential journals in its field in Brazil and Latin America with a high impact factor, since its inception it has garnered a growing share of the publishing market.