Impact of narrowing perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for left ventricular assist device implantation
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC..
BACKGROUND: Although infections are a significant potential complication among patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, standardized surgical infection prophylaxis (SIP) regimens are not well defined. At Montefiore Medical Center, a 4-drug SIP regimen containing fluconazole, ciprofloxacin, rifampin, and vancomycin was previously utilized. In January 2020, the antimicrobial stewardship program implemented a 2-drug SIP regimen of vancomycin and cefazolin to limit exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotics. This study evaluated LVAD-associated infection rates prior to and following the SIP revision.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent LVAD implantation from 1/2018 to 4/2021 was performed. Infections were classified using the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation definitions. Infection rates at 2 weeks, 30 days, and 90 days post-implantation in the 4-drug SIP regimen (1/2018-12/2019) and the 2-drug SIP regimen (1/2020 to 4/2021) were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were included. The number of patients with LVAD-associated infections (including surgical site infections) was not significantly different in either SIP group at 2 weeks (9% vs. 4%, p = .64), 30 days (9% vs. 11%, p = .99), or 90 days (19% vs. 14%, p = .75). There was no statistically significant difference in 30 or 90-day mortality. LVAD-associated gram-negative (7% vs. 7%; p > .99) and fungal (5% vs. 0%; p = .51) infections were uncommon. The most common organism isolated was Staphylococcus aureus, and the most common type of infection was pneumonia in both SIP groups.
CONCLUSION: No significant difference in LVAD-associated infections or infection-related mortality was observed with de-escalation of perioperative antibiotics. Additional studies with larger sample sizes are needed to endorse the findings of this study.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:24 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society - 24(2022), 5 vom: 05. Okt., Seite e13900 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Allen, Lauren [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 19.10.2022 Date Revised 19.10.2022 published: Print Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1111/tid.13900 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM343062062 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM343062062 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226015544.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/tid.13900 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1143.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM343062062 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)35785460 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Allen, Lauren |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Impact of narrowing perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for left ventricular assist device implantation |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 19.10.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 19.10.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Although infections are a significant potential complication among patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, standardized surgical infection prophylaxis (SIP) regimens are not well defined. At Montefiore Medical Center, a 4-drug SIP regimen containing fluconazole, ciprofloxacin, rifampin, and vancomycin was previously utilized. In January 2020, the antimicrobial stewardship program implemented a 2-drug SIP regimen of vancomycin and cefazolin to limit exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotics. This study evaluated LVAD-associated infection rates prior to and following the SIP revision | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent LVAD implantation from 1/2018 to 4/2021 was performed. Infections were classified using the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation definitions. Infection rates at 2 weeks, 30 days, and 90 days post-implantation in the 4-drug SIP regimen (1/2018-12/2019) and the 2-drug SIP regimen (1/2020 to 4/2021) were compared | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were included. The number of patients with LVAD-associated infections (including surgical site infections) was not significantly different in either SIP group at 2 weeks (9% vs. 4%, p = .64), 30 days (9% vs. 11%, p = .99), or 90 days (19% vs. 14%, p = .75). There was no statistically significant difference in 30 or 90-day mortality. LVAD-associated gram-negative (7% vs. 7%; p > .99) and fungal (5% vs. 0%; p = .51) infections were uncommon. The most common organism isolated was Staphylococcus aureus, and the most common type of infection was pneumonia in both SIP groups | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: No significant difference in LVAD-associated infections or infection-related mortality was observed with de-escalation of perioperative antibiotics. Additional studies with larger sample sizes are needed to endorse the findings of this study | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a LVAD-associated infections | |
| 650 | 4 | |a antimicrobial stewardship | |
| 650 | 4 | |a device infection | |
| 650 | 4 | |a left ventricular assist devices | |
| 650 | 4 | |a surgical infection prophylaxis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a surgical site infections | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Anti-Bacterial Agents |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Ciprofloxacin |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 5E8K9I0O4U |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Vancomycin |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 6Q205EH1VU |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Fluconazole |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 8VZV102JFY |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Cefazolin |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a IHS69L0Y4T |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Rifampin |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a VJT6J7R4TR |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bartash, Rachel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Minamoto, Grace Y |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cowman, Kelsie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Patel, Snehal |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Vukelic, Sasa |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nnani, Daryl U |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fauvel, Daphenie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Guo, Yi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society |d 1999 |g 24(2022), 5 vom: 05. Okt., Seite e13900 |w (DE-627)NLM113005482 |x 1399-3062 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:2022 |g number:5 |g day:05 |g month:10 |g pages:e13900 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tid.13900 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 24 |j 2022 |e 5 |b 05 |c 10 |h e13900 | ||