The effect of duration of antimicrobial treatment for bacteremia in critically ill patients on in-hospital mortality – Retrospective double center analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Excessive duration of antibiotic treatment is a major factor for inappropriate antibiotic consumption. Although in some instances shorter antibiotic courses are as efficient as longer ones, no specific recommendations as to the duration of antimicrobial treatment for bloodstream infections currently exist. In the present study, we investigated the effect of antibiotic treatment duration on in-hospital mortality using retrospective data from two cohorts that included patients with bacteremia at two Swiss tertiary Intensive Care Units (ICUs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall 8227 consecutive patients requiring ICU admission were screened for bacteremia between 01/2012-12/2013 in Lausanne and between 07/2016-05/2017 in Bern. Patients with an infection known to require prolonged treatment or having single positive blood culture with common contaminant pathogens were excluded. The primary outcome of interest was the time from start of antimicrobial treatment to in-hospital death or hospital discharge, whichever comes first. The predictor of interest was adequate antimicrobial treatment duration, further divided into shorter (≤10 days) and longer (>10 days) durations. A time-dependent Cox model and a cloning approach were used to address immortality bias. The secondary outcomes were the median duration of antimicrobial treatment for patients with bacteremia overall and stratified by underlying infectious syndrome and pathogens in the case of secondary bacteremia. RESULTS: Out of the 707 patients with positive blood cultures, 382 were included into the primary analysis. Median duration of antibiotic therapy was 14 days (IQR, 7-20). Most bacteremia (84%) were monomicrobial; 18% of all episodes were primary bacteremia. Respiratory (28%), intra-abdominal (23%) and catheter infections (17%) were the most common sources of secondary bacteremia. Using methods to mitigate the risk of confounding associated with antibiotic treatment durations, shorter versus longer treatment groups showed no differences in in-hospital survival (time-dependent Cox-model: HR 1.5, 95% CI (0.8, 2.7), p = 0.20; Cloning approach: HR 1.0, 95% CI (0.7,1.5) p = 0.83). Sensitivity analyses showed that the interpretation did not change when using a 7 days cut-off. CONCLUSIONS: In this restrospective study, we found no evidence for a survival benefit of longer (>10 days) versus shorter treatment course in ICU patients with bacteremia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered on clinicatrials.gov (NCT05236283), 11 February 2022. The respective cantonal ethics commission (KEK Bern # 2021-02302) has approved the study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".