Retrospective Observational Assessment of the Impact of Cefepime Prophylaxis in Neutropenic Pediatric Patients With Acute Myelogenous Leukemia.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
The potential for cefepime prophylaxis to reduce bloodstream infections (BSIs) in pediatric patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) has been incompletely characterized.
METHODS
A retrospective quasi-experimental study of patients under 21 years of age admitted with AML from 2010 through 2018 at two affiliated pediatric tertiary-care hospitals before and after the adoption of routine cefepime prophylaxis for afebrile AML patients during profound neutropenia.
RESULTS
The rate of BSIs per 1000 neutropenia days was significantly lower in the prophylaxis group than the baseline group (2.6 vs 15.5, incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.17, 95% CI 0.09-0.32). Interrupted time-series analysis showed that a sharp reduction in BSIs coincided with the implementation of prophylaxis. Bacteremia with viridans group streptococci was frequent in the baseline group but not observed after adopting prophylaxis. Despite the increased use of cefepime, the rate of cefepime-nonsusceptible BSIs per 1000 neutropenia days decreased (1.6 vs 4.1, IRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.16-0.99). The median number of febrile neutropenia episodes per patient also decreased in the prophylaxis group, as did the proportion of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (22/51 (43.1%) vs 26/38 (68.4%); risk difference -25.3%, 95% CI -44.4 to -2.8). A trend was observed toward an increased proportion of patients with Clostridioides difficile infection in the prophylaxis group (10/51 (19.6%) vs 3/38 (7.9%); risk difference 11.7%, 95% CI -3.4 to 29.0).
CONCLUSIONS
Cefepime prophylaxis was associated with a significant reduction in BSIs, febrile neutropenia, and ICU admission among pediatric AML patients.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.