Antibiotic stewardship program in Intensive Care Unit: First report from Iran

• Published in: International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science Vol. 8; no. 2; pp. 83 - 89
• Main Authors: Vahidi, Ghoncheh, Mohammadi, Mostafa, Shojaei, Lida, Ramezani, Masoud, Jafari, Sirus, Khalili, Hossein
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: India Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 01.04.2018
• Subjects: Original; meropenem; Antibiotic stewardship; piperacillin-tazobactam; sepsis
• ISSN: 2229-5151; 2231-5004
• DOI: 10.4103/IJCIIS.IJCIIS_10_18

Few data regarding antibiotic stewardship programs in critically ill patients are available. In the present study, the consequence of changing an empirical antibiotic regimen from a carbapenem (meropenem) to a noncarbapenem antibiotic (piperacillin-tazobactam) was evaluated in critically ill patients with a suspicion of sepsis. This open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted during May 2015-January 2017 at the general Intensive Care Unit of the Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran, Iran. In this study, a carbapenem (meropenem) or a noncarbapenem (piperacillin-tazobactam) antibiotic was considered as an empirical antibiotic regimen in 100 critically ill patients with a suspicion of sepsis. Clinical response and bacterial eradication were defined as primary and secondary outcomes of the study, respectively. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney, and independent sample -tests were used for comparing variables between the groups. ANOVA was used to compare changes in the mean differences of parameters between the groups. Meaningful difference was indicated as ≤ 0.05. During the first 72 h of the antibiotic course, the number of patients with clinical response was comparable between piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem groups (21 [42%] and 25 [50%], respectively, = 0.31). Also, at this time, microbial eradication occurred in 13 (54.16%) and 9 (40.90%) patients in piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem groups, respectively ( = 0.67). Using a carbapenem (meropenem) instead of a noncarbapenem (piperacillin-tazobactam) as an empirical antibiotic regimen did not affect clinical response and bacterial eradication rates in critically ill patients with a suspicion of sepsis.