Background The aim of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) to colistin-based regimen in the treatment of infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE). Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study of inpatients who received either CAZ-AVI or intravenous colistin for treatment of infections due to CRE. The study was conducted in 5 tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Main study outcomes included in-hospital mortality, clinical cure at end of treatment, and acute kidney injury (AKI). Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression model were conducted to assess the independent impact of CAZ-AVI on the clinical outcome. Results A total of 230 patients were included in this study: 149 patients received CAZ-AVI and 81 patients received colistin-based regimen. Clinical cure (71% vs 52%; P = 0.004; OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.31–4.01) was significantly more common in patients who received CAZ-AVI. After adjusting the difference between the two groups, treatment with CAZ-AVI is independently associated with clinical cure (adjusted OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.28–5.91). In-hospital mortality (35% vs 44%; P = 0.156; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.39–1.16) was lower in patients who received CAZ-AVI but the difference was not significant. AKI (15% vs 33%; P = 0.002; OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19–0.69) was significantly less common in patients who received CAZ-AVI. Conclusion CAZ-AVI is associated with higher rate of clinical cure and lower rate of AKI compared to colistin. Our findings support the preferential use of CAZ-AVI over colistin-based regimen for treating these infections.

No abstract

In conclusion, targeting vancomycin trough levels above 15 µg/mL in pediatrics would overshoot the target AUC0-24h above 400 and expose them to unnecessary adverse events.

Purpose: To assess current patterns of antibiotic use by carrying out two point-prevalence surveys (PPS) in Madinah after the return of hajj pilgrims from Makkah and when Madinah is free from pilgrims. Methods: In September 2016 and November 2016, a prospective PPS was conducted on two separate dates (during the hajj pilgrims stay in Madinah and after they leave). Data on antibiotics use were generated during these two periods. This involved an audit from all the departments of two referral hospitals (King Fahad Hospital (KFH) - 425 beds, and Al Ansar Hospital - 100 beds) of inpatients records. Data were collected using standard forms adapted from the European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC). Results: A total of 675 inpatients were included in PPS; among them, 332 (49.18 %) patients were receiving antibiotic therapy. In September 2016, 168 patients were treated with antibiotics, with a prevalence rate of 50.60 %, whereas, in November 2016, the prevalence rate was 49.40 %. Overall, 198 patients were identified in surgical wards, of which 132 patients (66.6 %) were receiving antibiotic therapy; 121 patients in ICU of which 70 patients (57.8 %) received antibiotics; 13 patients in other wards of which 6 (46.1 %) received antibiotic treatment; and 343 patients in medical wards of which 126 patients (36.7 %) were treated with antibiotics. There was no significant difference in prevalence of antibiotic prescribing between the two surveys (Pearson Chi-square test, p = 0.56) and with regards to patient age between the two surveys (Mann-Whitney U-test, p = 0.32). Conclusion: The results demonstrate that antibiotic use with adherence to hospital guidelines and PPS helps in identifying targets for quality improvement. Moreover, to escalate the prudent use of antibiotics in hospitals, PPS provides a useful tool. Furthermore, this survey provides a background to evaluate antibiotic use by a standardized methodology. Keywords: Point prevalence survey, Antibiotic use, Prescribing practices, Antibiotic resistance, Quality improvement, Antibiotic stewardship, Hajj, Pilgrims