Ceftazidime-avibactam and aztreonam, an interesting strategy to overcome β-lactam resistance conferred by metallo-β-lactamases in Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 61:e01008-17.

Introduction:Cefoxitin has a good in vitro activity and stability in resistance to hydrolysis by extended-spectrum beta-lactamases and is a good candidate for the treatment of urinary tract infection. However, data are scarce regarding its use in clinical practice.Methods:We conducted a retrospective study from September 2014 to November 2017, in a tertiary care hospital in Garches (France). We gathered all prescriptions of cefoxitin for urinary tract infection due to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase isolates. We compared the clinical outcomes between Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing isolates after a 90-day follow-up. When available, we assessed whether cefoxitin-based regimen was associated with an emergence of resistance.Results:The treatment of 31 patients with a mean age of 60 ± 18 years was analyzed. We observed a clinical cure of 96.7% (n = 30/31) at day 30 and of 81.2% (n = 13/16) and 85.7% (12/14) at day 90 for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates, respectively (p = 0.72). No adverse events were reported. One patient who relapsed carried a Klebsiella pneumoniae isolate that became intermediate to cefoxitin in the follow-up.Conclusion:In a period of major threat with a continuous increase of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase obliging to a policy of carbapenem-sparing regimens, it seems detrimental to deprive physicians of using cefoxitin for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Enterobacteriaceae for the treatment of urinary tract infection while our data show its efficacy.

Objective: To compare the impact of a care bundle including medication reconciliation at discharge by a pharmacist versus standard of care, on continuity of therapeutic changes between hospital and primary care and outcome of patients, within 1 month after discharge.Methods: Randomised controlled trial in 120 adult patients with at least one chronic disease and three current medications before admission, hospitalised in an infectious disease department of a tertiary hospital and discharged home. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a discharge care bundle including medication reconciliation, counselling session and documentation transfer to primary care physician (PCP) (intervention group) or standard of care (control group). Primary outcome was the proportion of in-hospital prescription changes, not maintained by the PCP, 1 month after discharge. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients experiencing early PCP's consultation, hospital readmissions or adverse reactions within 1-month postdischarge and cost of discharge prescriptions.Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. One month after discharge, the proportion of in-hospital prescription changes, not maintained by the PCP, was 11% in the intervention group versus 24% in the control group (P = .007). The median delay before PCP's consultation was longer in the intervention group (30.5 vs 19.5 days, P = .013), there were fewer patients readmitted to hospital (3.4% vs 20.7%, P = .009, odds ratio (OR) = 0.13 [0.02-0.53]) and fewer patients who suffered from adverse drug reaction (7.0% vs 22.8%, P = .04, OR = 0.26 [0.07-0.78]). Conclusion:This care bundle resulted in the reduction of treatment changes between hospital discharge and primary care.