Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Bacteraemia or bloodstream infections (BSI) are associated with much morbidity and mortality. Management of patients with bacteraemia is complex, and the increase in immunosuppressed patients and multidrug-resistant organisms poses additional challenges. The objective of this review is to assess the available published information about the impact of different aspects of management on the outcome of patients with BSI, and, specifically, the importance of infectious diseases specialists (IDS) consultation. The impact of management by IDS on different aspects, including interpretation of newer rapid techniques, early evaluation and treatment, and follow up, are reviewed. Overall, the available data suggest that IDS intervention improves the management and outcome of patients with BSI, either through consultation or structured unsolicited interventions in the context of multidisciplinary bacteraemia programmes.

Keywords

bacteraemia infectious diseases bacteraemia programs

Introduction

Bloodstream infection (BSI) are very frequent events and are associated with high morbidity and mortality. The population-based incidence of BSI has been estimated to range between 113 and 204 episodes per 100,000 person-years,¹ and has increased over the last decades, possibly as a consequence of the higher proportion of elderly and immunocompromised persons, increased use of invasive procedures and better diagnosis.² BSI is classified according to acquisition type into community and nosocomial onset; community-onset BSI are those presenting in patients not admitted to a hospital, or less than 72 h after admission. However, community-onset BSI are considered as healthcare-associated if occurring in patients receiving specialized home care, intravenous ambulatory treatment, haemodialysis or living in a long-term care facility.^3,4 Thus, the mortality of strict community-acquired BSI (10–16%) is usually lower than that of healthcare-associated (20–25%) or nosocomial episodes (25–35%).^3–5 In addition, antimicrobial-resistant pathogens are more frequent among healthcare-associated and nosocomial episodes.

In fact, the rate of BSI caused by microorganisms usually considered as multidrug-resistant (MDR), showing resistance to three or more families of antimicrobials, has increased considerably during recent decades. These include methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), enterobacteria producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL), AmpC beta-lactamases or carbapenemases, Pseudomonas aeruginosa showing resistance to multiple antipseudomonal agents, or Acinetobacter baumannii.⁶ However, the rate of MDR organisms in general, and causing BSI in particular, is heterogeneous in different hospitals and geographical areas. This increase in bacterial resistance, as well as in other infectious processes, has been associated with a rise in recurrence, and both hospital stays and costs.^7–10

Beyond acquisition and resistance, BSI are heterogeneous. Treating patients with bacteraemia is challenging. Importantly, identifying and appropriately removing the source of infection when feasible, early detection of complications or secondary foci, providing early appropriate treatment according to source, and administering the adequate duration of treatment may impact patient outcomes. It is well known that the input of an infectious diseases consultant improves the prognosis of patients with infections.^11,12

Bloodstream infections are classified according to the microbiological diagnosis and the source of infection, which helps to standardise clinical management. Bacteriemia programmes have led to a better optimisation of antimicrobial treatments and a better prognosis.

As reviewed here, the best way to achieve the best quality of treatment for patients with BSI is through specialized care by infectious diseases specialists (IDS), either directly or through consultation.¹³

Rapid detection of bacteraemia and information

Growth of bacteria in blood cultures usually takes around 10–20 h, depending on the organism, blood volume and bacterial inoculum; once growth is detected, a Gram stain provides preliminary and crucial information. More recently, the application of matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF) for the direct identification of pathogens from positive blood culture is used in many hospitals. In addition, the presence of bacteria (and some resistance mechanisms) in blood may be demonstrated more rapidly and directly using molecular methods.^14,15 A discussion about the accuracy and clinical impact of these rapid tests is beyond the objectives of this review. Rapid techniques have a positive impact on the appropriate use of antibiotics and outcome of patients when accompanied by rapid communication to IDS or when applied in the context of an antimicrobial stewardship programme.^16–27 Without such support, rapid results may not result in substantial improvements because of the complexity of integrating the microbiological information and clinical data, which frequently must be reassessed by carefully and directly re-examining the patient in order to take appropriate decisions in a timely manner.

Early clinical evaluation of patients with bacteraemia

A first consideration is whether any positive result from a blood sample may reflect a contamination during blood sample extraction. A careful evaluation is needed in these circumstances. Furthermore, there are some microorganisms that, when isolated, suggest certain infections.²⁸ The situations and aspects to consider are summarized in Table 1. Repetition of blood cultures is usually recommended; in case of a potential contamination, the drugs covering the potential contaminant can be withdrawn until more data are available in stable, low risk patients.

Table 1.

Evaluation of potential contamination of blood cultures.

Situations in which contamination of blood cultures are suspected
Isolation/detection of a typical contaminant from only one blood extraction in patients with low risk of infection caused by that microorganism (e.g. no vascular catheter or prosthetic valve).Isolation/detection of a typical contaminant together with a true pathogen in patients with a high suspicion of infection due to the true pathogen but low for the contaminant).Isolation of different morphologies of a typical contaminant(s) in different blood extractions.
Aspects to evaluate for decisions
The microorganism(s)The number of extractions in which the potential contaminant is presentThe predisposing factors of the patient for infection due to the potential contaminantThe clinical situation of the patient (severity of infection, underlying conditions)
Diagnostic implications of bacterial species identified from blood cultures
Staphylococcus aureus: IE and vertebral osteomyelitisStaphylococcus epidermidis: Device-related BSI and IEStreptococcus anginosus: Abscess (brain, lung, liver, or gastrointestinal)Streptococcus sanguinis: IEStreptococcus bovis: IEEnterococcus faecalis: IE, urinary tract infection, and intra-abdominal sourceClostridium septicum: Fatal sepsis in immunocompromised patientsBurkholderia pseudomallei: MelioidosisSalmonella enteritidis: Gastrointestinal tract infection and extraintestinal focus of infection, such as osteomyelitis, abscess, or mycotic aneurysmFusobacterium necrophorum: Lemiérre syndrome (often fatal)

IE, infective endocarditis.

All patients with BSI must be evaluated carefully as soon as the bacteraemia is detected. A full medical history is needed, including underlying conditions or procedures potentially predisposing to BSI and symptoms orientating about the potential source of entry/source of bacteraemia (see below), together with a complete medical examination evaluating the severity of infection and seeking the potential source of infection. At that moment, it is useful to measure some outcome predictive scores such as the Charlson index, Pitt bacteraemia score and SOFA,^29–31 and stating the presence of sepsis or septic shock is mandatory.³² Timely support therapy is needed in case of sepsis with organ failure.

The evaluation of patients with BSI by an IDS has proved to obtain better clinical results and higher efficiency thanks to BSI programmes, as will be detailed below.

Identification of the source of infection

Identifying the source of infection (and if needed, secondary foci) is an essential aspect in the evaluation of patients with BSI because early source control is considered a keystone in the management of patients with sepsis.³³ This includes abscess debridement or drainage, drainage of close-space purulent infections (e.g. peritonitis, empyema, arthritis), resolution of obstruction in urinary or biliary tract infections and removal of an infected device. For example, early catheter removal in short-term catheter-related infections has been associated with lower mortality in patients with bacteraemia and in candidaemia,^34,35 with removal being more frequent when patients were assessed by the IDS.^36,37

The source of infection is sometimes clinically evident, but this is not the case in many patients. Typically, the source of infection may not be readily apparent in neutropenic or other immunodepressed patients, children, elderly patients and in those with altered mental status; this is also the case for certain sources such as deep-seated abscesses (e.g. liver abscess), central line catheter infections or endocarditis. Therefore, the source of infection must be actively looked for in all cases. Clinical skill and experience are important. Even in patients with a clear predisposing factor for a specific infection (e.g. a urinary catheter for a urinary tract infection), alternative sources must always be considered. Also, in patients with transitory bacteraemia after an invasive procedure, the portal of entry may be suspected (e.g. the digestive tract after a gastroscopy), and a source of infection may not exist unless a secondary focus appears during the evolution.

Episodes of BSI without an identifiable source of infection were found to have a worse prognosis in some studies,^38,39 which may be due to the fact that these episodes sometimes occur in patients with severe underlying conditions and also because empirical treatment may also be more frequently inadequate in these patients. In this context, it has been demonstrated that patients followed by an infectious diseases consultant during the episode of bacteraemia achieve a higher identification of the source of infection and better control of it.⁴⁰ In studies that analyse potentially serious BSI, such as S. aureus bacteraemias (SAB), a higher number of echocardiographies were performed in those assessed by an infectious diseases specialist.⁴¹

Up to 25% of bacteraemia cases are considered to have a nonidentifiable source of infection and mortality can exceed 20% depending on the series.^42,43 In these cases, techniques such as scintigraphies with marked leucocytes or PET-CT-scan, may be of help for diagnosis.⁴⁴

Early administration of active antibiotic treatment

Early administration of active antimicrobials has been shown to be associated with lower mortality in patients with severe infections.^45,46 Several studies have also found that appropriate empirical therapy is associated with better outcomes in patients with BSI; the impact may be higher for patients with severe presentation, high-risk sources (e.g. pneumonia) and Gram-negative bacteria.^39,47–50 Therefore, adequate empirical antimicrobial coverage of patients with suspicion of bacteraemia is important but should always be tailored to avoid the overuse of broad-spectrum antimicrobial agents. This is far from easy; best decisions are taken considering the severity and source of the infection, the features of the patient, knowledge of colonization status of the patients and other specific risk factors for antimicrobial resistance, and local epidemiology. Some algorithms for the coverage of multidrug-resistant bacteria are being developed. In relation to the use of antibiotics with coverage for carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriacea, the implementation of scores such as Gianella risk score and the Increment score in carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae colonised patients have proved useful for starting empirical treatment with those agents.⁵¹

Early notification of the preliminary results of blood cultures, either from a Gram stain, MALDI-TOF identification or use of a molecular method, provides a unique opportunity to evaluate whether the empirical treatment administered may be continued until more information is available or must be readily changed. The use of rapid methods for detecting resistance mechanisms (e.g. specific beta-lactamases) may allow earlier adequate coverage for bacteria producing them and might also help to de-escalate from very broad to narrow spectrum drugs in some cases,^11–21,52 although the latter is a more difficult and risky decision. The situations and decisions frequently faced by the IDS are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Situations in which antimicrobial treatment may be reconsidered with availability of preliminary microbiological results for blood cultures. All decisions must follow a careful clinical evaluation.

Situation	Decision(s)
Positive blood cultures; empirical therapy not administered; contamination improbable	Start a drug appropriate for the suspected source and the type of microorganism according to preliminary microbiological information
Bacteria identified or mechanism of resistance detected, but not covered	Start/change to a drug appropriate for the suspected source and the type of microorganism or resistance mechanisms, according to preliminary microbiological information
Negative results for mechanism(s) of resistance, which are covered by the empirical therapy	Consider if de-escalation can be safely performed pending confirmatory results; be aware that other not-studied mechanisms of resistance may be present. Consider clinical stability
Combination therapy, one drug covering Gram-positive and the other covering Gram-negative bacteria	Stop the unnecessary drug if monomicrobial infection is highly probably; adjust the other drug as above.
Redundant combination therapy	Stop the unnecessary drug according to additional microbiological information, local susceptibility patterns and clinical stability

Finally, the use of rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing as recently recommended by EUCAST may also be very useful for early administration of active drugs and for streamlining therapy.⁵³ A meta-analysis evaluated the impact of rapid microbiological tests; 31 studies with 5920 patients were included. The mortality risk was lower with the use of rapid methods when the rapid tests were used in the context of an antibiotic stewardship program (OR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.51–0.79).⁵⁴

Follow up

Once susceptibility tests are available, streamlining of therapy is mandatory. BSI are frequently classified as complicated and uncomplicated. Generally speaking, BSI is considered complicated when presenting with organ failure or hypoperfusion (sepsis) or in which complications associated with increased mortality or relapse rates are present or are anticipated, such as endocarditis, persistent or recurrent bacteraemia, presence of secondary foci, or occurring in patients with predisposing conditions for the above (such as prosthetic valves in case of bacteria typically causing endocarditis, or severely immunodepressed patients). Some of the data that would classify an episode as complicated must be assessed during the first days of evolution. While all patients with BSI should be followed, those with a complicated infection needs a more careful assessment of their evolution. Specific data are provided according to the pathogens below.

Bacteraemia programmes

The application of the above measures, and those more specific depending on specific pathogens and patients, are better achieve by using structured actions which may be included in bacteraemia programmes or services.^55–57 These programmes are increasingly being implemented in hospitals.⁵⁸

A seminal prospective study analysed 428 BSI episodes in order to evaluate the impact of IDS consultation. IDS consultation was associated with appropriate empirical treatment, which in turn was associated with improved survival. After susceptibility testing, IDS intervention was also associated with earlier administration of active drugs, with lower use of broad spectrum drugs and higher prescription of sequential oral treatment.⁵⁹ A later quasiexperimental study evaluated the proportion of major errors (delay in diagnosis of sepsis >48 h, delay in administration of appropriate antibiotics in critically ill patients >6 h, and no administration of active drugs after susceptibility test data were available) in the management of BSI before and after an intervention based on the actions of a bacteraemia team and the elaboration of a local guideline. The intervention reduced the major errors from 30% to 8%.⁵⁷ Fluckiger and colleagues found that IDS more frequently de-escalated from broad spectrum drugs, and were associated with reduced length of hospital stay.⁶⁰ Bouza and colleagues evaluated different ways to communicate the Gram stain results of blood cultures using a randomised trial design; reporting the results by an IDS improved the average number of days of appropriate therapy.⁶¹ Recently, a prospective cohort study investigated the impact of unsolicited consultation with IDS in patients with BSI. The results showed that IDS consultation was independently associated with an increase in the proportion of appropriate antibiotic therapy. When the specific aspects of therapy were analysed, IDS provided a more adequate duration of therapy, more frequent and earlier de-escalation, changes of empirical regimens and better source identification. Importantly, when the IDS recommendations were fully followed, lower mortality was also shown.⁴⁰ As described above, the results of a meta-analysis suggested the importance of using rapid microbiological methods with an antimicrobial stewardship programme in patients with BSI.⁵⁴

Therefore, implementation of bacteraemia programmes, in which IDS, clinical microbiologists and pharmacists works together to actively provide recommendations for the management of all patients with BSI without waiting for being consulted would seem advisable in all hospitals.

Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia

Because of its intrinsic complexity, many studies have evaluated the impact of IDS consultation in the outcome of patients with SAB. In these studies, IDS consultation has been associated with improved management and sometimes lower mortality.^62–67 A meta-analysis if studies evaluating the impact of IDS consultation included 5337 patients from 18 studies.⁶⁸ IDS consultation was associated with lower mortality both at day 30 (RR = 0.53; CI 95% 0.43–0.65) and at day 90 (RR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64–0.92), as well as lower risk of recurrence (RR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39–0.99).

However, the impact of IDS might depend on the specific ability of local specialists. Lopez-Cortés and colleagues took additional steps by first defining the bundle of key evidence-based management aspects that would impact on outcome, and second establishing efficient implementation methods.⁶⁹ The bundle of measures included performance of follow-up blood cultures in all cases, early source control, early use of cloxacillin or cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible isolates, measuring vancomycin levels when this drug was used, performing echocardigraphy when indicated and appropriate duration according to complexity. By using a multicenter quasiexperimental design, they found that implementation of a structured intervention including timely written and oral recommendations based on the bundle was associated with increase in adherence to the measures and reduced mortality. These results have been replicated,^70,71 which reinforces the applicability of this approach. A randomized controlled trial tested an algorithm for the management of Staphylococcus spp. bacteraemia, including coagulase-negative staphylococci. The algorithm comprised diagnostic procedures to be performed, drugs according to susceptibility and treatment duration; the algorithm was not inferior in clinical success when compared with usual care; the clinical success rate was somewhat better for patients with SAB treated with the algorithm but the estimations were not precise.⁷²

Candidaemia

Candidaemia is associated with 35–75% mortality rates.^73–76 Among patients with septic shock, candidaemia is an independent predictor of mortality.⁷⁷ Several aspects in the management are recommended, including early removal of central venous catheter,^35,78 early treatment with active drug (an echinocandin is recommended for neutropenic patients, those with septic shock or risk factors for azole-resistance; fluconazole may be used otherwise), follow-up blood cultures until negative, fundoscopy, sequential therapy with fluconazole (if in vitro active) when clinical stability has been reached and appropriate duration of treatment. Because of the complexity of management, IDS consultation is recommended in all cases.⁷⁹ In a study, 213 patients with candidaemia were included in order to evaluate whether adherence to five main elements was associated with improved survival. The elements were: appropriate selection of initial therapy, follow-up blood cultures, echocardiography when indicated, ophthalmological examination and removal of a central venous catheter. Multivariate analysis showed that the number of elements achieved was associated with increased survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30–0.52].⁸⁰ Another study found much room for improvement in the management of candidaemia; adherence of less than 50% of the guideline-based recommendations was independently associated with a higher mortality (HR = 3.55, 95% CI: 2.24–5.64).⁸¹

With regards to this, in a recent retrospective study where 145 episodes of candidaemia were analysed (77% assessed by the IDS), in the group that received these recommendations, as well as a higher adherence to the IDSA recommendations for the management of candidaemia, there was lower inpatient mortality, at 30- and 60-day follow up (20% versus 50%, p < 0.0001; 24% versus 59%, p < 0.0001; 21% versus 56%, p < 0.0001, respectively).⁸²

In a study performed in Japan, 283 episodes of candidaemia were analysed retrospectively in cases where a consultation to the IDS took place (44.5%) and in those where it did not (55.1%). The independent factors associated with the increase of mortality at 30 days were the presence of urinary catheters (adjusted HR = 2.94; 95% CI = 1.48–5.87; p = 0.002) and the severity of the infection (adjusted HR = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.20–3.65; p = 0.009). The consultation to the ID consultant meant a reduction in mortality in this group (adjusted HR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.32–0.90; p = 0.017). Although the study has some limitations due to its retrospective nature, the lack of other confusing factors not included in the analysis, as well as not including the time analysis in the infectious disease specialist intervention from the positive result of the blood culture, these results demonstrate the benefits derived from this counselling on infectious events.³⁶

Bacteraemia due to Gram-negative bacteria

Delay in administering active treatment has been associated with increased mortality in patients with bacteraemia due to Gram-negative bacteria.^83–86 However, avoiding the use of broad-spectrum drugs in these patients is important from an antibiotic stewardship perspective.

De-escalation from antipseudomonal agents has been shown to be safe in a recent multicentre cohort study.⁸⁷ In this sense, a quasiexperimental study evaluated an antibiotic stewardship intervention including rapid techniques (MALDI-TOD and FilmArray blood culture identification) in patients with bacteraemia due to Gram negative bacteria. The intervention was associated with lower combination regimens, less use of antipseudomonal/carbapenems and shorter time until de-escalation.²³ Another study evaluated an stewardship programme associated with rapid identification with MALDI-TOF in patients with bacteraemia due to multidrug-resistant Gram negatives; again the intervention was associated with shorter time until appropriate therapy, shorter hospital stay and lower mortality.¹⁸

In another recent trial, 4214 patients with multiresistant microorganisms isolated in blood, broncho-alveolar lavage and other sterile sites were analysed retrospectively, with the primary objective of evaluating the impact on mortality and rate of readmissions when these were assessed by the IDS. In patients assessed with resistant S. aureus infections, mortality at day 30 and a year was lower (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36–0.63; and HR,0.73, 95% CI, 0.61–0.86), the same as in resistant enterobacteriaceae (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27–0.64; and HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59–0.94) and in the case of patients with polymicrobial infections mortality was lower at day 30 (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.62–1.06). Furthermore, there were fewer readmissions in those patients with resistant enterobacteriaceae. Although the study has limitations, such as its retrospective nature, the loss to follow up of some patients and the lack of analysis of suitable antimicrobial therapy as factors that may influence mortality, the data suggest, as in previous studies, the beneficial effect of consultations with IDS on infections caused by resistant pathogens.⁸⁸

The increase in resistance to multiple antibiotics in these bacteria pose an additional challenge for their treatment. This is particularly relevant in the case of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriacae and extensively-drug resistant P. aeruginosa or A. baumannii, for which the available therapeutic options are very limited. Early active therapy has been associated with improved survival in a multinational cohort study of BSI due to carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae.⁸⁹ In that study, patients with high probability of death measured by the predefined INCREMENT score had lower mortality if treated with a combination of two active drugs.⁹⁰ The selection of the more appropriate drugs to be used must be done by considering the available drugs, the severity and source of infection, and patient characteristics; also the dosing must be optimized to maximize exposure.⁹¹

Conclusion

BSI are potentially serious frequent events in our daily clinical practice, to which complexity is added the emergence of multidrug-resistant pathogens, which are becoming more and more frequent and difficult to treat.

As we have seen, enough evidence exists to support the benefits of stewardship programs on bacteraemias performed by a consultant on infectious diseases with the support of the new systems of microbiological diagnosis. This leads to more appropriate use of antibiotics and better management of these patients as well as higher numbers of identification and control of the source of infection, which means getting better clinical results without an impact on stays or costs. All these advantages make implementation of IDS consultation advisable for all hospitals.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and publication of this article: LELC and JRB receives funding for research from Plan Nacional de I + D + i 2013–2016 and Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Subdirección General de Redes y Centros de Investigación Cooperativa, Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD16/0016/0001), cofinanced by European Development Regional Fund “A way to achieve Europe, Operative program Intelligent Growth 2014–2020.

Conflict of interest statement

JR-B participated as a speaker in accredited educational activities funded by Merck. LELC has been a speaker for Merck, Sharp and Dohme, Pfizer, and Angelini, has received funding from Novartis for research activities, and has served as a trainer for Merck, Sharp and Dohme. PAJ has no conflicts of interest.

Ethical statement

Our study did not require an ethical board approval because it did not contain human or animal trials.

ORCID iD

Patricia Jiménez-Aguilar

References

Goto

Al-Hasan

MN.

Overall burden of bloodstream infection and nosocomial bloodstream infection in North America and Europe. Clin Microbiol Infect 2013; 19: 501–509.

Søgaard

Nørgaard

Dethlefsen

, et al. Temporal changes in the incidence and 30-day mortality associated with bacteremia in hospitalized patients from 1992 through 2006: a population-based cohort study. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52: 61–69.

Friedman

Kaye

Stout

, et al. Health care–associated bloodstream infections in adults: a reason to change the accepted definition of community-acquired infections. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137: 791–797.

Siegman-Igra

Fourer

Orni-Wasserlauf

, et al. Reappraisal of community-acquired bacteremia: a proposal of a new classification for the spectrum of acquisition of bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 1431–1439.

Mandell

Wunderink

Anzueto

, et al. Infectious diseases society of America/American thoracic society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44(Suppl. 2): S27–S72.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in Europe. Annual report of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net) 2017. Stockholm: ECDC, 2018.

Cosgrove

Kaye

Eliopoulous

, et al. Health and economic outcomes of the emergence of third-generation cephalosporin resistance in Enterobacter species. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 185–190.

de Kraker

MEA

Davey

Grundmann

, et al. Mortality and hospital stay associated with resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli bacteremia: estimating the burden of antibiotic resistance in Europe. PLoS Med 2011; 8: e1001104.

Mauldin

Salgado

Hansen

, et al. Attributable hospital cost and length of stay associated with health care-associated infections caused by antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54: 109–115.

10.

Thaden

Ruffin

, et al. Increased costs associated with bloodstream infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria are due primarily to patients with hospital-acquired infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61: S238–S245.

11.

Petrak

Sexton

Butera

, et al. The value of an infectious diseases specialist. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 36: 1013–1017.

12.

McQuillen

Petrak

Wasserman

, et al. The value of infectious diseases specialists: non-patient care activities. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47: 1051–1063.

13.

López-Cortés

Cueto

de Rodríguez-Baño

How should we best treat patients with bloodstream infections?

Future Microbiol 2017; 12: 927–930.

14.

Vardakas

Anifantaki

Trigkidis

, et al. Rapid molecular diagnostic tests in patients with bacteremia: evaluation of their impact on decision making and clinical outcomes. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2015; 34: 2149–2160.

15.

Sinha

Jupe

Mack

, et al. Emerging technologies for molecular diagnosis of sepsis. Clin Microbiol Rev 2018; 31. pii: e00089-17.

16.

Bauer

Perez

Forrest

, et al. Review of rapid diagnostic tests used by antimicrobial stewardship programs. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 59(Suppl. 3): S134–S145.

17.

Barlam

Cosgrove

Abbo

, et al. Implementing an antibiotic stewardship program: guidelines by the infectious diseases society of America and the society for healthcare epidemiology of America. Clin Infect Dis 2016; 62: e51–e77.

18.

Cernoch

Musick

Olsen

, et al. Integrating rapid diagnostics and antimicrobial stewardship improves outcomes in patients with antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteremia. J Infect. 2014; 69: 216–225.

19.

Huang

Newton

Kunapuli

, et al. Impact of rapid organism identification via matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight combined with antimicrobial stewardship team intervention in adult patients with bacteremia and candidemia. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 57: 1237–1245.

20.

Niwa

Yonetamari

Hayama

, et al. Clinical impact of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry combined with antimicrobial stewardship interventions in patients with bloodstream infections in a Japanese tertiary hospital. Int J Clin Pract 2019; 73: e13332.

21.

Jeon

Seong

Kim

, et al. Impact of matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometric evaluation on the clinical outcomes of patients with bacteremia and fungemia in clinical settings lacking an antimicrobial stewardship program: a pre-post quasi experimental study. BMC Infect Dis 2018; 18: 385.

22.

Pliakos

Andreatos

Shehadeh

, et al. The cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic testing for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections with or without antimicrobial stewardship. Clin Microbiol Rev 2018; 31. pii: e00095-17.

23.

Bookstaver

Nimmich

Smith

, et al. Cumulative effect of an antimicrobial stewardship and rapid diagnostic testing bundle on early streamlining of antimicrobial therapy in Gram-negative bloodstream infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61. pii: e00189-17.

24.

Köck

Wüllenweber

Horn

, et al. Implementation of short incubation MALDI-TOF MS identification from positive blood cultures in routine diagnostics and effects on empiric antimicrobial therapy. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2017; 6: 12.

25.

Patel

Kaakeh

Nagel

, et al. Cost Analysis of implementing matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry plus real-time antimicrobial stewardship intervention for bloodstream infections. J Clin Microbiol 2017; 55: 60–67.

26.

Verroken

Defourny

le Polain de Waroux

, et al. Correction: clinical impact of MALDI-TOF MS identification and rapid susceptibility testing on adequate antimicrobial treatment in sepsis with positive blood cultures. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0160537.

27.

Lockwood

Perez

Musick

, et al. Integrating rapid diagnostics and antimicrobial stewardship in two community hospitals improved process measures and antibiotic adjustment time. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016; 37: 425–432.

28.

Seifert

The clinical importance of microbiological findings in the diagnosis and management of bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48(Suppl. 4): S238–S245.

29.

Charlson

Pompei

Ales

, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 373–383.

30.

Hilf

Sharp

, et al. Antibiotic therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: outcome correlations in a prospective study of 200 patients. Am J Med 1989; 87: 540–546.

31.

Vincent

Moreno

Takala

, et al. The SOFA (sepsis-related organ failure assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the working group on sepsis-related problems of the European society of intensive care medicine. Intensive Care Med 1996; 22: 707–710.

32.

Singer

Deutschman

Seymour

, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016; 315: 801–810.

33.

Rhodes

Evans

Alhazzani

, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Crit Care Med 2017; 45: 486–552.

34.

Burnham

Rojek

Kollef

MH.

Catheter removal and outcomes of multidrug-resistant central-line-associated bloodstream infection. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018; 97: e12782.

35.

Puig-Asensio

Padilla

Garnacho-Montero

, et al. Epidemiology and predictive factors for early and late mortality in Candida bloodstream infections: a population-based surveillance in Spain. Clin Microbiol Infect 2014; 20: O245–O254.

36.

Takakura

Fujihara

Saito

, et al. Improved clinical outcome of patients with Candida bloodstream infections through direct consultation by infectious diseases physicians in a Japanese university hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006; 27: 964–968.

37.

Jenkins

Price

Sabel

, et al. Impact of routine infectious diseases service consultation on the evaluation, management, and outcomes of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46: 1000–1008.

38.

Vallés

Rello

Ochagavía

, et al. Community-acquired bloodstream infection in critically ill adult patients: impact of shock and inappropriate antibiotic therapy on survival. Chest 2003; 123: 1615–1624.

39.

Retamar

Portillo

López-Prieto

, et al. Impact of inadequate empirical therapy on the mortality of patients with bloodstream infections: a propensity score-based analysis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012; 56: 472–478.

40.

Jiménez-Aguilar

Romero-Palacios

De-la-Calle

, et al. Unsolicited consultation by infectious diseases specialist improves outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: a prospective cohort study. J Infect 2018; 77: 503–508.

41.

Saunderson

Gouliouris

Nickerson

, et al. Impact of routine bedside infectious disease consultation on clinical management and outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in adults. Clin Microbiol Infect 2015; 21: 779–785.

42.

Weinstein

Towns

Quartey

, et al. The clinical significance of positive blood cultures in the 1990s: a prospective comprehensive evaluation of the microbiology, epidemiology, and outcome of bacteremia and fungemia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 24: 584–602.

43.

Renaud

Brun-Buisson

and ICU-Bacteremia study group. Outcomes of primary and catheter-related bacteremia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001; 163: 1584–1590.

44.

Pijl

Glaudemans

AWJM

Slart

RHJA

, et al. FDG-PET/CT for detecting an infection focus in patients with bloodstream infection: factors affecting diagnostic yield. Clin Nucl Med 2019; 44: 99–106.

45.

Kollef

Sherman

Ward

, et al. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. Chest 1999; 115: 462–474.

46.

Kumar

Roberts

Wood

, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: 1589–1596.

47.

Yamaga

Shime

Association between appropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy and mortality from bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit. J Infect Chemother 2018; 24: 267–271.

48.

Battle

Bookstaver

Justo

, et al. Association between inappropriate empirical antimicrobial therapy and hospital length of stay in Gram-negative bloodstream infections: stratification by prognosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2017; 72: 299–304.

49.

Chen

Lin

, et al. Outcome of inadequate empirical antibiotic therapy in emergency department patients with community-onset bloodstream infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2013; 68: 947–953.

50.

Kang

Kim

Park

, et al. Bloodstream infections caused by antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacilli: risk factors for mortality and impact of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 760–766.

51.

Cano

Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez

Machuca

, et al. Risks of infection and mortality among patients colonized with Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae: validation of scores and proposal for management. Clin Infect Dis 2018; 66: 1204–1210.

52.

Seifert

The clinical importance of microbiological findings in the diagnosis and management of bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48(Suppl. 4): S238–S245.

53.

European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). Methodology - EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) directly from positive blood culture bottles, http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/RAST/Methodology_EUCAST_RAST_v1_20181126.pdf (2018).

54.

Timbrook

Morton

McConeghy

, et al. The effect of molecular rapid diagnostic testing on clinical outcomes in bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2017; 64: 15–23.

55.

Diamantis

Rioux

Bonnal

, et al. Evaluation of initial antibiotic therapy for bacteremia and role of an antibiotic management team for antibiotic stewardship. Médecine Mal Infect 2010; 40: 637–643.

56.

Scheetz

Bolon

Postelnick

, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of an antimicrobial stewardship team on bloodstream infections: a probabilistic analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 63: 816–825.

57.

Minton

Clayton

Sandoe

, et al. Improving early management of bloodstream infection: a quality improvement project. BMJ 2008; 336: 440–443.

58.

Rodríguez-Baño

de Cueto

Retamar

, et al. Current management of bloodstream infections. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2010; 8: 815–829.

59.

Byl

Clevenbergh

Jacobs

, et al. Impact of infectious diseases specialists and microbiological data on the appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy for bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 1999; 29: 60–66; discussion 67–68.

60.

Fluckiger

Zimmerli

Sax

, et al. Clinical impact of an infectious disease service on the management of bloodstream infection. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2000; 19: 493–500.

61.

Bouza

Sousa

Muñoz

, et al. Bloodstream infections: a trial of the impact of different methods of reporting positive blood culture results. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39: 1161–1169.

62.

Lahey

Shah

Gittzus

, et al. Infectious diseases consultation lowers mortality from Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Medicine (Baltimore) 2009; 88: 263–267.

63.

Martin

Harris

Brooks

, et al. Management and outcomes in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia after implementation of mandatory infectious diseases consult: a before/after study. BMC Infect Dis 2015; 15: 568.

64.

Nagao

Iinuma

Saito

, et al. Close cooperation between infectious disease physicians and attending physicians can result in better management and outcome for patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010; 16: 1783–1788.

65.

Bai

Showler

Burry

, et al. Impact of infectious disease consultation on quality of care, mortality, and length of stay in staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: results from a large multicenter cohort study. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 60: 1451–1461.

66.

Schmitt

McQuillen

Nahass

, et al. Infectious diseases specialty intervention is associated with decreased mortality and lower healthcare costs. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 58: 22–28.

67.

Honda

Krauss

Jones

, et al. The value of infectious diseases consultation in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Am J Med 2010; 123: 631–637.

68.

Vogel

Schmitz

RPH

Hagel

, et al. Infectious disease consultation for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia - a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect 2016; 72: 19–28.

69.

López-Cortés

Del Toro

Gálvez-Acebal

, et al. Impact of an evidence-based bundle intervention in the quality-of-care management and outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 57: 1225–1233.

70.

Borde

Batin

Rieg

, et al. Adherence to an antibiotic stewardship bundle targeting Staphylococcus aureus blood stream infections at a 200-bed community hospital. Infection 2014; 42: 713–719.

71.

Pérez-Rodríguez

Sousa

López-Cortés

, et al. Moving beyond unsolicited consultation: additional impact of a structured intervention on mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2019; 74: 1101–1107.

72.

Holland

Raad

Boucher

, et al. Effect of algorithm-based therapy vs usual care on clinical success and serious adverse events in patients with staphylococcal bacteremia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2018; 320: 1249–1258.

73.

Falagas

Apostolou

Pappas

VD.

Attributable mortality of candidemia: a systematic review of matched cohort and case-control studies. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 25: 419–425.

74.

Paiva

Pereira

Tabah

, et al. Characteristics and risk factors for 28-day mortality of hospital acquired fungemias in ICUs: data from the EUROBACT study. Crit Care 2016; 20: 53.

75.

Tedeschi

Tumietto

Giannella

, et al. Epidemiology and outcome of candidemia in internal medicine wards: a regional study in Italy. Eur J Intern Med 2016; 34: 39–44.

76.

Eliakim-Raz

Babaoff

Yahav

, et al. Epidemiology, microbiology, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of candidemia in internal medicine wards-a retrospective study. Int J Infect Dis 2016; 52: 49–54.

77.

Lundberg

Perl

Wiblin

, et al. Septic shock: an analysis of outcomes for patients with onset on hospital wards versus intensive care units. Crit Care Med 1998; 26: 1020–1024.

78.

Garnacho-Montero

Díaz-Martín

García-Cabrera

, et al. Impact on hospital mortality of catheter removal and adequate antifungal therapy in Candida spp. bloodstream infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2013; 68: 206–213.

79.

Ruhnke

Antifungal stewardship in invasive Candida infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2014; 20(Suppl. 6): 11–18.

80.

Murri

Giovannenze

Camici

, et al. Systematic clinical management of patients with candidemia improves survival. J Infect 2018; 77: 145–150.

81.

Cuervo

Garcia-Vidal

Puig-Asensio

, et al. Usefulness of guideline recommendations for prognosis in patients with candidemia. Med Mycol 2018; 57: 659–667.

82.

Lee

Zurko

Camins

, et al. Impact of infectious disease consultation on clinical management and mortality in patients with candidemia. Clin Infect Dis 2019; 68: 1585–1587.

83.

Retamar

López-Prieto

Rodríguez-López

, et al. Predictors of early mortality in very elderly patients with bacteremia: a prospective multicenter cohort. Int J Infect Dis 2014; 26: 83–87.

84.

Lodise

Zhao

Fahrbach

, et al. A systematic review of the association between delayed appropriate therapy and mortality among patients hospitalized with infections due to Klebsiella pneumoniae or Escherichia coli: how long is too long? BMC Infect Dis 2018; 18: 625.

85.

Bonine

Berger

Altincatal

, et al. Impact of delayed appropriate antibiotic therapy on patient outcomes by antibiotic resistance status from serious Gram-negative bacterial infections. Am J Med Sci 2019; 357: 103–110.

86.

Delle Rose

Pezzotti

Fontana

, et al. An in-depth analysis of nosocomial bloodstream infections due to Gram-negative bacilli: clinical features, microbiological characteristics and predictors of mortality in a 1 year, prospective study in a large tertiary care Italian hospital. Infect Dis (Lond) 2019; 51: 12–22.

87.

Palacios-Baena

Delgado-Valverde

Valiente Méndez

, et al. Impact of de-escalation on prognosis of patients with bacteraemia due to Enterobacteriaceae: a post-hoc analysis from a multicenter prospective cohort. Clin Infect Dis 2019; 69: 956–962.

88.

Burnham

Olsen

Stwalley

, et al. Infectious diseases consultation reduces 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality for multidrug-resistant organism infections. Open forum Infect Dis 2018; 5: ofy026.

89.

Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez

Salamanca

de Cueto

, et al. Effect of appropriate combination therapy on mortality of patients with bloodstream infections due to carbapenemase-producing enterobacteriaceae (INCREMENT): a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2017; 17: 726–734.

90.

Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez

Salamanca

de Cueto

, et al. A predictive model of mortality in patients with bloodstream infections due to carbapenemase-producing enterobacteriaceae. Mayo Clin Proc 2016; 91: 1362–1371.

91.

Rodríguez-Baño

Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez

Machuca

, et al. Treatment of infections caused by extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-, AmpC-, and carbapenemase-producing enterobacteriaceae. Clin Microbiol Rev 2018; 31: pii: e00079-17.

Impact of infectious diseases consultation on the outcome of patients with bacteraemia

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Rapid detection of bacteraemia and information

Early clinical evaluation of patients with bacteraemia

Identification of the source of infection

Early administration of active antibiotic treatment

Follow up

Bacteraemia programmes

Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia

Candidaemia

Bacteraemia due to Gram-negative bacteria

Conclusion

Footnotes

Funding

Conflict of interest statement

Ethical statement

ORCID iD

References