探索由产生ampc的肠杆菌引起的血液感染的抗生素选择的异质性:来自病例研究的结果。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Gianpiero Tebano, Caterina Campoli, Marianna Meschiari, Ilaria Contadini, Sara Grasselli, Claudia Lazzaretti, Martina Maritati, Luigi Raumer, Matteo Rinaldi, Nicolò Rossi, Kristian Scolz, Elisa Vanino, Cristina Mussini, Pierluigi Viale, Francesco Cristini
{"title":"探索由产生ampc的肠杆菌引起的血液感染的抗生素选择的异质性:来自病例研究的结果。","authors":"Gianpiero Tebano, Caterina Campoli, Marianna Meschiari, Ilaria Contadini, Sara Grasselli, Claudia Lazzaretti, Martina Maritati, Luigi Raumer, Matteo Rinaldi, Nicolò Rossi, Kristian Scolz, Elisa Vanino, Cristina Mussini, Pierluigi Viale, Francesco Cristini","doi":"10.1007/s10096-025-05293-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by AmpC-producing Enterobacterales (AmpC-E) remains controversial, due to limited clinical evidence and variable resistance profiles. Inappropriate antibiotic choices can induce ampC-encoding gene overexpression, leading to increased risk of therapeutic failure. This study aims to explore the current prescribing preferences among infectious disease (ID) physicians, in complex clinical scenarios involving BSIs caused by AmpC-E.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A web-based case-vignette survey was conducted among a purposive sample of senior ID physicians from 10 ID units in Emilia-Romagna Region, northern Italy. Participants responded to 31 vignettes simulating BSIs caused by Enterobacter cloacae (wild-type or derepressed phenotype) or Serratia marcescens (wild-type phenotype), across varied clinical settings. For each scenario, participants selected their preferred antibiotic regimen.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two ID physicians were invited to participate. Cefepime (48.4%) and meropenem (29.0%) were the most prescribed agents, followed by piperacillin-tazobactam (16.1%) and third-generation cephalosporins (3GC) (6.5%). Cefepime was preferred in milder cases, while meropenem in severe infections, particularly with high inoculum or incomplete source control. Considerable heterogeneity in treatment choices was observed, especially for S. marcescens and E. cloacae with wild-type phenotypes. Agreement among clinicians was highest for intensive care admitted patients. Combination therapies were infrequently proposed (8.8% overall), primarily in the setting of intra-abdominal infections with incomplete source control or ventilator-associated pneumonia.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights significant variability in the treatment of AmpC-E BSIs among ID physicians, reflecting clinical uncertainty and lack of high-quality evidence. Further research and updated, context-specific guidelines are needed to harmonize practice and promote optimal antibiotic stewardship.</p>","PeriodicalId":11782,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring heterogeneity in antibiotic choices for bloodstream infections caused by AmpC-producing enterobacterales: results from a case-vignette study.\",\"authors\":\"Gianpiero Tebano, Caterina Campoli, Marianna Meschiari, Ilaria Contadini, Sara Grasselli, Claudia Lazzaretti, Martina Maritati, Luigi Raumer, Matteo Rinaldi, Nicolò Rossi, Kristian Scolz, Elisa Vanino, Cristina Mussini, Pierluigi Viale, Francesco Cristini\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10096-025-05293-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by AmpC-producing Enterobacterales (AmpC-E) remains controversial, due to limited clinical evidence and variable resistance profiles. Inappropriate antibiotic choices can induce ampC-encoding gene overexpression, leading to increased risk of therapeutic failure. This study aims to explore the current prescribing preferences among infectious disease (ID) physicians, in complex clinical scenarios involving BSIs caused by AmpC-E.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A web-based case-vignette survey was conducted among a purposive sample of senior ID physicians from 10 ID units in Emilia-Romagna Region, northern Italy. Participants responded to 31 vignettes simulating BSIs caused by Enterobacter cloacae (wild-type or derepressed phenotype) or Serratia marcescens (wild-type phenotype), across varied clinical settings. For each scenario, participants selected their preferred antibiotic regimen.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two ID physicians were invited to participate. Cefepime (48.4%) and meropenem (29.0%) were the most prescribed agents, followed by piperacillin-tazobactam (16.1%) and third-generation cephalosporins (3GC) (6.5%). Cefepime was preferred in milder cases, while meropenem in severe infections, particularly with high inoculum or incomplete source control. Considerable heterogeneity in treatment choices was observed, especially for S. marcescens and E. cloacae with wild-type phenotypes. Agreement among clinicians was highest for intensive care admitted patients. Combination therapies were infrequently proposed (8.8% overall), primarily in the setting of intra-abdominal infections with incomplete source control or ventilator-associated pneumonia.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights significant variability in the treatment of AmpC-E BSIs among ID physicians, reflecting clinical uncertainty and lack of high-quality evidence. Further research and updated, context-specific guidelines are needed to harmonize practice and promote optimal antibiotic stewardship.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-025-05293-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-025-05293-4","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

目的:由于有限的临床证据和不同的耐药谱,产生ampc的肠杆菌(AmpC-E)引起的血流感染(bsi)的治疗仍然存在争议。不适当的抗生素选择可诱导ampc编码基因过表达,导致治疗失败的风险增加。本研究旨在探讨感染性疾病(ID)医生在涉及AmpC-E引起的脑损伤的复杂临床情况下的处方偏好。方法:在意大利北部艾米利亚-罗马涅地区10个ID单位的高级ID医生中进行了一项基于网络的案例调查。在不同的临床环境中,参与者对31个模拟阴沟肠杆菌(野生型或低表达表型)或粘质沙雷菌(野生型表型)引起的脑损伤有反应。对于每种情况,参与者选择他们喜欢的抗生素方案。结果:共邀请42名内科医生参与。头孢吡肟(48.4%)和美罗培南(29.0%)是处方最多的药物,其次是哌拉西林-他唑巴坦(16.1%)和第三代头孢菌素(6.5%)。头孢吡肟适用于较轻的病例,而美罗培南适用于严重感染,特别是高接种量或源控制不完全的病例。在处理选择上观察到相当大的异质性,特别是对于粘质链球菌和阴沟链球菌具有野生型表型。临床医生对重症监护住院患者的认同程度最高。联合治疗很少被提出(总体8.8%),主要是在源控制不完全的腹腔感染或呼吸机相关性肺炎的情况下。结论:本研究突出了ID医生在治疗AmpC-E bsi方面的显著差异,反映了临床不确定性和缺乏高质量证据。需要进一步研究和更新针对具体情况的指南,以协调实践并促进最佳抗生素管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring heterogeneity in antibiotic choices for bloodstream infections caused by AmpC-producing enterobacterales: results from a case-vignette study.

Purpose: The treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by AmpC-producing Enterobacterales (AmpC-E) remains controversial, due to limited clinical evidence and variable resistance profiles. Inappropriate antibiotic choices can induce ampC-encoding gene overexpression, leading to increased risk of therapeutic failure. This study aims to explore the current prescribing preferences among infectious disease (ID) physicians, in complex clinical scenarios involving BSIs caused by AmpC-E.

Methods: A web-based case-vignette survey was conducted among a purposive sample of senior ID physicians from 10 ID units in Emilia-Romagna Region, northern Italy. Participants responded to 31 vignettes simulating BSIs caused by Enterobacter cloacae (wild-type or derepressed phenotype) or Serratia marcescens (wild-type phenotype), across varied clinical settings. For each scenario, participants selected their preferred antibiotic regimen.

Results: Forty-two ID physicians were invited to participate. Cefepime (48.4%) and meropenem (29.0%) were the most prescribed agents, followed by piperacillin-tazobactam (16.1%) and third-generation cephalosporins (3GC) (6.5%). Cefepime was preferred in milder cases, while meropenem in severe infections, particularly with high inoculum or incomplete source control. Considerable heterogeneity in treatment choices was observed, especially for S. marcescens and E. cloacae with wild-type phenotypes. Agreement among clinicians was highest for intensive care admitted patients. Combination therapies were infrequently proposed (8.8% overall), primarily in the setting of intra-abdominal infections with incomplete source control or ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Conclusion: This study highlights significant variability in the treatment of AmpC-E BSIs among ID physicians, reflecting clinical uncertainty and lack of high-quality evidence. Further research and updated, context-specific guidelines are needed to harmonize practice and promote optimal antibiotic stewardship.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
2.20%
发文量
138
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCMID is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the publication of communications on infectious diseases of bacterial, viral and parasitic origin.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信