A descriptive design was carried out studying the correlation between antimicrobial consumption and resistance profiles of ESKAPE pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter spp.) in a Peruvian hospital, including the surgical, clinical areas and the intensive care unit (ICU) during the time period between 2015 and 2018. There was a significant correlation between using ceftazidime and the increase of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolations (R = 0.97; p < 0.05) and the resistance to piperacillin/tazobactam in Enterobacter spp. and ciprofloxacin usage (R = 0.97; p < 0.05) in the medical wards. The Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistance to piperacillin/tazobactam and amikacin in the intensive care unit (ICU) had a significant reduction from 2015 to 2018 (67% vs. 28.6%, 65% vs. 34.9%, p < 0.001). These findings give valuable information about the rates and dynamics in the relationship between antibiotic usage and antimicrobial resistance patterns in a Peruvian hospital and reinforce the need for continuous support and assessment of antimicrobial stewardship strategies, including microbiological indicators and antimicrobial consumption patterns.

Conflictos de interés. Cristhian Hernández-Gómez y María Virginia Villegas han recibido honorarios por consultoría, conferencias científicas o apoyo a la investigación de Merck Sharp & Dohme y Pfizer. Los otros autores declaran no tener conflictos de interés para este artículo. El presente estudio no tuvo fuentes de financiación o patrocinios. Fue realizado con recursos propios de las instituciones participantes.

No abstract

Objectives The objective of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness (C-E) of ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ/AVI)-based therapy versus colistin (COL)-based therapy for pneumonia and bacteraemia caused by carbapenem-resistant enterobacteria (CRE) adjusted to Peruvian context. Methods A Markov decision model was extrapolated from literature to evaluate the clinical and economic consequences of CAZ/AVI-based therapy compared to COL-based therapy for a hypothetical cohort of patients with CRE pneumonia or bacteraemia according to Peruvian context. It was adopted a 5-year time horizon and a Markov-cycle length of 1 year. All patients in the model were assigned to CRE pneumonia or bacteraemia state and may transit through four different health states: home-care, long-term care without dialysis, long-term care with dialysis or death. Key findings Intervention with CAZ/AVI becomes progressively more cost-effective from a threshold of S/ 24,000 or US$ 6666 (equivalent to 1 Gross Domestic Product-per cápita [GDP-pc]). The model simulation allowed to calculate an average total cost of S/ 2’971,582 (US$ 825,440) for CAZ/AVI against S/2’056,488 (US$ 571.247) for COL treatment, yielding an incremental cost of S/ 915,094 (US$ 254,193). The cost/QALY for CAZ/AVI treatment against COL therapy approaches to S/23,154 (US$ 6432), something less than 1 annual GDP-pc. There were additional benefits associated with CAZ/AVI in the 5-year horizon, such as: 21 deaths avoided, 86 hospital days avoided, 1 CRF5 avoided and a NMB of S/6649 (US$ 1847). Conclusions The present transferability model demonstrates the C-E of CAZ/AVI over COL for the treatment of bacteraemia and CRE pneumonia according to peruvian payment thresholds.

The impact of respiratory coinfections in COVID-19 is still not well understood despite the growing evidence that consider coinfections greater than expected. A total of 295 patients older than 18 years of age, hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of moderate/severe pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 infection (according to definitions established by the Ministry of Health of Peru) were enrolled during the study period. A coinfection with one or more respiratory pathogens was detected in 154 (52.2%) patients at hospital admission. The most common coinfections were Mycoplasma pneumoniae (28.1%), Chlamydia pneumoniae (8.8%) and with both bacteria (11.5%); followed by Adenovirus (1.7%), Mycoplasma pneumoniae/Adenovirus (0.7%), Chlamydia pneumoniae/Adenovirus (0.7%), RSV-B/Chlamydia pneumoniae (0.3%) and Mycoplasma pneumoniae/Chlamydia pneumoniae/Adenovirus (0.3%). Expectoration was less frequent in coinfected individuals compared to non-coinfected (5.8% vs. 12.8%). Sepsis was more frequent among coinfected patients than non-coinfected individuals (33.1% vs. 20.6%) and 41% of the patients who received macrolides empirically were PCR-positive for Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydia pneumoniae.