-
JAMA Oct 2023Cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam are commonly administered to hospitalized adults for empirical treatment of infection. Although piperacillin-tazobactam has been...
IMPORTANCE
Cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam are commonly administered to hospitalized adults for empirical treatment of infection. Although piperacillin-tazobactam has been hypothesized to cause acute kidney injury and cefepime has been hypothesized to cause neurological dysfunction, their comparative safety has not been evaluated in a randomized clinical trial.
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether the choice between cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam affects the risks of acute kidney injury or neurological dysfunction.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
The Antibiotic Choice on Renal Outcomes (ACORN) randomized clinical trial compared cefepime vs piperacillin-tazobactam in adults for whom a clinician initiated an order for antipseudomonal antibiotics within 12 hours of presentation to the hospital in the emergency department or medical intensive care unit at an academic medical center in the US between November 10, 2021, and October 7, 2022. The final date of follow-up was November 4, 2022.
INTERVENTIONS
Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the highest stage of acute kidney injury or death by day 14, measured on a 5-level ordinal scale ranging from no acute kidney injury to death. The 2 secondary outcomes were the incidence of major adverse kidney events at day 14 and the number of days alive and free of delirium and coma within 14 days.
RESULTS
There were 2511 patients included in the primary analysis (median age, 58 years [IQR, 43-69 years]; 42.7% were female; 16.3% were Non-Hispanic Black; 5.4% were Hispanic; 94.7% were enrolled in the emergency department; and 77.2% were receiving vancomycin at enrollment). The highest stage of acute kidney injury or death was not significantly different between the cefepime group and the piperacillin-tazobactam group; there were 85 patients (n = 1214; 7.0%) in the cefepime group with stage 3 acute kidney injury and 92 (7.6%) who died vs 97 patients (n = 1297; 7.5%) in the piperacillin-tazobactam group with stage 3 acute kidney injury and 78 (6.0%) who died (odds ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.80 to 1.13], P = .56). The incidence of major adverse kidney events at day 14 did not differ between groups (124 patients [10.2%] in the cefepime group vs 114 patients [8.8%] in the piperacillin-tazobactam group; absolute difference, 1.4% [95% CI, -1.0% to 3.8%]). Patients in the cefepime group experienced fewer days alive and free of delirium and coma within 14 days (mean [SD], 11.9 [4.6] days vs 12.2 [4.3] days in the piperacillin-tazobactam group; odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.65 to 0.95]).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among hospitalized adults in this randomized clinical trial, treatment with piperacillin-tazobactam did not increase the incidence of acute kidney injury or death. Treatment with cefepime resulted in more neurological dysfunction.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05094154.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cefepime; Coma; Piperacillin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Retrospective Studies; Piperacillin, Tazobactam Drug Combination; Sepsis; Acute Kidney Injury; Kidney; Delirium
PubMed: 37837651
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.20583 -
Critical Care (London, England) Jul 2023Personalization of ICU nutrition is essential to future of critical care. Recommendations from American/European guidelines and practice suggestions incorporating recent... (Review)
Review
Personalization of ICU nutrition is essential to future of critical care. Recommendations from American/European guidelines and practice suggestions incorporating recent literature are presented. Low-dose enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN) can be started within 48 h of admission. While EN is preferred route of delivery, new data highlight PN can be given safely without increased risk; thus, when early EN is not feasible, provision of isocaloric PN is effective and results in similar outcomes. Indirect calorimetry (IC) measurement of energy expenditure (EE) is recommended by both European/American guidelines after stabilization post-ICU admission. Below-measured EE (~ 70%) targets should be used during early phase and increased to match EE later in stay. Low-dose protein delivery can be used early (~ D1-2) (< 0.8 g/kg/d) and progressed to ≥ 1.2 g/kg/d as patients stabilize, with consideration of avoiding higher protein in unstable patients and in acute kidney injury not on CRRT. Intermittent-feeding schedules hold promise for further research. Clinicians must be aware of delivered energy/protein and what percentage of targets delivered nutrition represents. Computerized nutrition monitoring systems/platforms have become widely available. In patients at risk of micronutrient/vitamin losses (i.e., CRRT), evaluation of micronutrient levels should be considered post-ICU days 5-7 with repletion of deficiencies where indicated. In future, we hope use of muscle monitors such as ultrasound, CT scan, and/or BIA will be utilized to assess nutrition risk and monitor response to nutrition. Use of specialized anabolic nutrients such as HMB, creatine, and leucine to improve strength/muscle mass is promising in other populations and deserves future study. In post-ICU setting, continued use of IC measurement and other muscle measures should be considered to guide nutrition. Research on using rehabilitation interventions such as cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to guide post-ICU exercise/rehabilitation prescription and using anabolic agents such as testosterone/oxandrolone to promote post-ICU recovery is needed.
Topics: Humans; Intensive Care Units; Nutritional Support; Critical Care; Nutritional Status; Enteral Nutrition; Critical Illness
PubMed: 37403125
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04539-x -
Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology... Sep 2023Our objective was to evaluate the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of teduglutide treatment in infants and children with short bowel syndrome with intestinal... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
Our objective was to evaluate the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of teduglutide treatment in infants and children with short bowel syndrome with intestinal failure (SBS-IF).
METHODS
Two open-label phase 3 studies and 1 extension study investigated the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of teduglutide (0.05 mg/kg/day) in infants and children with SBS-IF: NCT03571516, 24-week study of infants who were randomized to receive teduglutide or standard of care (SoC); NCT02980666, 24-week study of infants and children who all received teduglutide; and NCT03268811, 24-week extension study of patients who completed NCT02980666 (patients could receive up to 48 weeks of total treatment).
RESULTS
Twelve infants and 8 children enrolled in the core studies, and 2 infants and 7 children in the extension study. After 24 weeks of treatment, parenteral support (PS) requirements reduced by ≥20% from baseline for 4 infants (57.1%) and 4 children (66.7%) receiving teduglutide and for 2 infants receiving SoC (50.0%). One infant (50.0%) and 4 children (80.0%) receiving teduglutide maintained the ≥20% reduction in PS at 48 weeks of treatment. Two children receiving teduglutide achieved enteral autonomy, after 12 weeks and 28 weeks of treatment, respectively. All adverse events (AEs) were in line with known impacts of SBS-IF and adverse reactions to teduglutide. Only one serious AE (abdominal pain) was considered related to teduglutide.
CONCLUSIONS
Short- and long-term treatment with teduglutide resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in PS requirements for infants and children with SBS-IF. Teduglutide was well tolerated, and efficacy improved with longer-term treatment.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Child; Short Bowel Syndrome; Parenteral Nutrition; Intestine, Small; Peptides; Gastrointestinal Agents
PubMed: 37364133
DOI: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000003867