Delayed treatment of seriously infected patients results in increased mortality. However, antimicrobial therapy for the initial 24 to 48 hours is mostly empirically provided, without evidence regarding the causative pathogen. Whether empiric anti-enterococcal therapy should be administered to treat intra-abdominal infection (IAI) before obtaining culture results remains unknown. We performed a meta-analysis to explore the effects of empiric enterococci covered antibiotic therapy in IAI and the risk factors for enterococcal infection in IAI.
Methods:
We searched multiple databases systematically and included 23 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 13 observational studies. The quality of included studies was assessed, and the reporting bias was evaluated. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects or fixed effects models according to the heterogeneity. The risk ratio (RR), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.
Results:
Enterococci-covered antibiotic regimens provided no improvement in treatment success compared with control regimens (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97–1.00; p = 0.15), with similar mortality and adverse effects in both arms. Basic characteristic analysis revealed that most of the enrolled patients with IAI in RCTs were young, lower risk community-acquired intra-abdominal infection (CA-IAI) patients with a relatively low APACHE II score. Interestingly, risk factor screening revealed that malignancy, corticosteroid use, operation, any antibiotic treatment, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), and indwelling urinary catheter could predispose the patients with IAI to a substantially higher risk of enterococcal infection. “Hospital acquired” itself was a risk factor (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 2.34–3.39; p < 0.001).
Conclusion:
It is unnecessary to use additional agents empirically to specifically provide anti-enterococcal coverage for the management of CA-IAI in lower risk patients without evidence of causative pathogen, and risk factors can increase the risk of enterococcal infection. Thus, there is a rationale for providing empiric anti-enterococcal coverage for severely ill patients with CA-IAI with high risk factors and patients with hospital-acquired intra-abdominal infection (HA-IAI).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MazuskiJE, TessierJM, MayAK, et al.The Surgical Infection Society Revised Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection. Surg Infect, 2017; 18:1–76.
2.
PaulM, ShaniV, MuchtarE, et al.Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy for sepsis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2010; 54:4851–4863.
3.
SchwaberMJ, Klarfeld-LidjiS, Navon-VeneziaS, et al.Predictors of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae acquisition among hospitalized adults and effect of acquisition on mortality. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2008; 52:1028–1033.
4.
WenerKM, SchechnerV, GoldHS, et al.Treatment with fluoroquinolones or with beta-lactam–beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations is a risk factor for isolation of extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase–producing Klebsiella species in hospitalized patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2010; 54:2010–2016.
5.
HuttnerA, HarbarthS, CarletJ, et al.Antimicrobial resistance: A global view from the 2013 World Healthcare-Associated Infections Forum. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control, 2013; 2:31.
6.
Garnacho-MonteroJ, Ortiz-LeybaC, Herrera-MeleroI, et al.Mortality and morbidity attributable to inadequate empirical antimicrobial therapy in patients admitted to the ICU with sepsis: A matched cohort study. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2008; 61:436–441.
7.
GauzitR, PeanY, BarthX, et al.Epidemiology, management, and prognosis of secondary non-postoperative peritonitis: A French prospective observational multicenter study. Surg Infect, 2009; 10:119–127.
8.
TellorB, SkrupkyLP, SymonsW, et al.Inadequate source control and inappropriate antibiotics are key determinants of mortality in patients with intra-abdominal sepsis and associated bacteremia. Surg Infect, 2015; 16:785–793.
9.
SolomkinJS, YellinAE, RotsteinOD, et al.Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intraabdominal infections: Results of a double-blind, randomized comparative phase III trial. Ann Surg, 2003; 237:235–245.
10.
ChatterjeeI, IredellJR, WoodsM, et al.The implications of enterococci for the intensive care unit. Crit Care Resusc, 2007; 9:69–75.
11.
JannaschO, KelchB, AdolfD, et al.Nosocomial infections and microbiologic spectrum after major elective surgery of the pancreas, liver, stomach, and esophagus. Surg Infect, 2015; 16:338–345.
12.
ZhangJ, ZhaoC, ChenH, et al.A multicenter epidemiology study on the risk factors and clinical outcomes of nosocomial intra-abdominal infections in China: Results from the Chinese Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance of Nosocomial Infections (CARES) 2007–2016. Infect Drug Resist, 2018; 11:2311–2319.
13.
SolomkinJS, MazuskiJE, BaronEJ, et al.Guidelines for the selection of anti-infective agents for complicated intra-abdominal infections. Clin Infect Dis, 2003; 37:997–1005.
14.
SolomkinJS, MazuskiJE, BradleyJS, et al.Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection in adults and children: Guidelines by the Surgical Infection Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Surg Infect, 2010; 11:79–109.
15.
ChromikAM, MeiserA, HollingJ, et al.Identification of patients at risk for development of tertiary peritonitis on a surgical intensive care unit. J Gastrointest Surg, 2009; 13:1358–1367.
16.
HarbarthS, UckayI. Are there patients with peritonitis who require empiric therapy for enterococcus?. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2004; 23:73–77.
17.
JooEJ, KangCI, HaYE, et al.Impact of inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy on outcome in Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia: A stratified analysis according to sites of infection. Infection, 2011; 39:309–318.
18.
SottoA, LefrantJY, Fabbro-PerayP, et al.Evaluation of antimicrobial therapy management of 120 consecutive patients with secondary peritonitis. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2002; 50:569–576.
19.
SuppliM, AabenhusR, HarboeZB, et al.Mortality in enterococcal bloodstream infections increases with inappropriate antimicrobial therapy. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2011; 17:1078–1083.
20.
DupontH, FriggeriA, TouzeauJ, et al.Enterococci increase the morbidity and mortality associated with severe intra-abdominal infections in elderly patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2011; 66:2379–2385.
21.
MoherD, CookDJ, EastwoodS, et al.Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet, 1999; 354:1896–1900.
22.
CumpstonM, LiT, PageMJ, et al.Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: A new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019; 10:ED000142.
23.
StangA. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010; 25:603–605.
24.
Sitges-SerraA, LopezMJ, GirventM, et al.Postoperative enterococcal infection after treatment of complicated intra-abdominal sepsis. Br J Surg, 2002; 89:361–367.
25.
RoehrbornA, ThomasL, PotreckO, et al.The microbiology of postoperative peritonitis. Clin Infect Dis, 2001; 33:1513–1519.
26.
ShiL, WuD, WeiL, et al.Nosocomial and community-acquired spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with liver cirrhosis in China: Comparative microbiology and therapeutic implications. Sci Rep, 2017; 7:46025.
27.
ShoganBD, SmithDP, ChristleyS, et al.Intestinal anastomotic injury alters spatially defined microbiome composition and function. Microbiome, 2014; 2:35.
28.
RunyonBA, AASLD Practice GuidelinesCommittee. Management of adult patients with ascites due to cirrhosis: An update. Hepatology, 2009; 49:2087–2107.
29.
AdamD, LinglofT, FloretD, et al.Piperacillin/tazobactam versus cefotaxime plus metronidazole for the treatment of severe intra-abdominal infection in hospitalized pediatric patients. Curr Ther Res, 2001; 62:488–502.
30.
CohnSM, LipsettPA, BuchmanTG, et al.Comparison of intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intraabdominal infections. Ann Surg, 2000; 232:254–262.
31.
Dela PenaAS, AspergerW, KockerlingF, et al.Efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections requiring surgical intervention. J Gastrointest Surg, 2006; 10:567–574.
32.
MaltezouHC, NikolaidisP, LebesiiE, et al.Piperacillin/tazobactam versus cefotaxime plus metronidazole for treatment of children with intra-abdominal infections requiring surgery. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2001; 20:643–646.
33.
NamiasN, SolomkinJS, JensenEH, et al.Randomized, multicenter, double-blind study of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of intravenous ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized adults. Surg Infect, 2007; 8:15–28.
34.
OhlinB, CederbergA, ForssellH, et al.Piperacillin/tazobactam compared with cefuroxime/metronidazole in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Eur J Surg, 1999; 165:875–884.
35.
LucastiC, PopescuI, RameshMK, et al.Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized adults: Results of a randomized, double-blind, Phase II trial. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2013; 68:1183–1192.
36.
LucastiC, HershbergerE, MillerB, et al.Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, phase II trial to assess the safety and efficacy of ceftolozane-tazobactam plus metronidazole compared with meropenem in adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2014; 58:5350–5357.
37.
MazuskiJE, GasinkLB, ArmstrongJ, et al.Efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection: Results from a randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 program. Clin Infect Dis, 2016; 62:1380–1389.
38.
QinX, TranBG, KimMJ, et al.A randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem for complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalised adults in Asia. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2017; 49:579–588.
39.
SolomkinJ, HershbergerE, MillerB, et al.Ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole for complicated intra-abdominal infections in an era of multidrug resistance: Results from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ASPECT-cIAI). Clin Infect Dis, 2015; 60:1462–1471.
40.
De WaeleJJ, TelladoJM, AlderJ, et al.Randomised clinical trial of moxifloxacin versus ertapenem in complicated intra-abdominal infections: Results of the PROMISE study. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2013; 41:57–64.
41.
SolomkinJ, ZhaoYP, MaEL, et al.Moxifloxacin is non-inferior to combination therapy with ceftriaxone plus metronidazole in patients with community-origin complicated intra-abdominal infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2009; 34:439–445.
42.
WanCD, LiuT, ZhouJ, et al.Randomized controlled trial of moxifloxacin vs cefmenoxime plus arilin in treating pancreatic diseases associated with abdominal infection. J Abdom Surg, 2007; 20:230–231.
43.
BariePS, VogelSB, DellingerEP, et al.A randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing cefepime plus metronidazole with imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections. Cefepime Intra-abdominal Infection Study Group. Arch Surg, 1997; 132:1294–1302.
44.
GarbinoJ, VilligerP, CaviezelA, et al.A randomized prospective study of cefepime plus metronidazole with imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Infection, 2007; 35:161–166.
45.
SolomkinJ, EvansD, SlepaviciusA, et al.Assessing the efficacy and safety of eravacycline vs ertapenem in complicated intra-abdominal infections in the Investigating Gram-Negative Infections Treated With Eravacycline (IGNITE 1) Trial: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg, 2017; 152:224–232.
46.
SolomkinJS, RameshMK, CesnauskasG, et al.Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of the efficacy and safety of two dose regimens of eravacycline versus ertapenem for adult community-acquired complicated intra-abdominal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2014; 58:1847–1854.
47.
QvistN, WarrenB, Leister-TebbeH, et al.Efficacy of tigecycline versus ceftriaxone plus metronidazole for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections: Results from a randomized, controlled trial. Surg Infect, 2012; 13:102–109.
48.
TowfighS, PasternakJ, PoirierA, et al.A multicentre, open-label, randomized comparative study of tigecycline versus ceftriaxone sodium plus metronidazole for the treatment of hospitalized subjects with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2010; 16:1274–1281.
49.
CatenaF, VallicelliC, AnsaloniL, et al.T.E.A. Study: Three-day ertapenem versus three-day ampicillin-sulbactam. BMC Gastroenterol, 2013; 13:76.
50.
WalkerAP, NicholsRL, WilsonRF, et al.Efficacy of a beta-lactamase inhibitor combination for serious intraabdominal infections. Ann Surg, 1993; 217:115–121.
51.
BaoJF, ZhangSQ, LiuHF, et al.Analysis of related factors and etiology features on liver cirrhosis patients with spontaneous enterococcal peritonitis. Int J Epidemiol Infect Dis, 2011; 38:371–374.
52.
BurnettRJ, HaverstockDC, DellingerEP, et al.Definition of the role of enterococcus in intraabdominal infection: Analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Surgery, 1995; 118:716–721.
53.
CercenadoE, TorrobaL, CantonR, et al.Multicenter study evaluating the role of enterococci in secondary bacterial peritonitis. J Clin Microbiol, 2010; 48:456–459.
54.
EdeyM, HawleyCM, McDonaldSP, et al.Enterococcal peritonitis in Australian peritoneal dialysis patients: Predictors, treatment and outcomes in 116 cases. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 2010; 25:1272–1278.
55.
KaffarnikMF, UrbanM, HoptUT, et al.Impact of enterococcus on immunocompetent and immunosuppressed patients with perforation of the small or large bowel. Technol Health Care, 2012; 20:37–48.
56.
KangCI, ChungDR, KoKS, et al.Clinical predictors for enterococcal bacteraemia in patients with bacteraemic intra-abdominal infections. Scand J Infect Dis, 2010; 42:817–820.
57.
ReukenPA, PletzMW, BaierM, et al.Emergence of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis due to enterococci—Risk factors and outcome in a 12-year retrospective study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2012; 35:1199–1208.
58.
SartelliM, CatenaF, AnsaloniL, et al.Complicated intra-abdominal infections in Europe: A comprehensive review of the CIAO study. World J Emerg Surg, 2012; 7:36.
59.
SeguinP, BrianchonC, LauneyY, et al.Are enterococci playing a role in postoperative peritonitis in critically ill patients?. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2012; 31:1479–1485.
60.
SwensonBR, MetzgerR, HedrickTL, et al.Choosing antibiotics for intra-abdominal infections: What do we mean by “high risk”?. Surg Infect, 2009; 10:29–39.
61.
TepplerH, McCarrollK, GesserRM, et al.Surgical infections with enterococcus: Outcome in patients treated with ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam. Surg Infect, 2002; 3:337–349.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
