Infections due to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae are a major public health concern, in particular in the intensive care unit (ICU), due to the increase in their incidence. Carbapenems are the treatment of choice of these infections, but their increased use may select for carbapenem resistance in Gram-negative bacilli, which currently represents the greatest threat in terms of antibiotic resistance. Several retrospective studies have shown that the use of non-carbapenem antibiotics (mainly the association of piperacillin/tazobactam, but also cefepime and temocillin) may be safe alternatives to carbapenems to treat these pathogens when the strain is susceptible to the corresponding antibiotic. However, one recent randomized controlled study, the Merino trial, failed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of piperacillin/tazobactam, as compared to meropenem, in patients with Gram-negative bacilli bacteremia resistant to third generation cephalosporins (mainly ESBL producers). However, the patients included in that study were not ICU patients, dosing and modalities of piperacillin/tazobactam administration were not optimal (30-min infusion whereas 4-hours infusion may be associated with better outcome), and cause of death of patients in the piperacillin/tazobactam arm were not due to antimicrobial treatment failure (mostly death due to care withdrawal in cancer patients). Recently, a retrospective bicenter study performed in ICU patients showed that outcome of patients with severe infection (i.e. sepsis and septic shock according to the Sepsis-3 definition) due to ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae susceptible to non-carbapenem agents treated with a non-carbapenem agent was similar to that of patients treated with carbapenems. Given the scarcity of data in ICU patients, the disputable results of the Merino trial, we will therefore conduct a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial of non-carbapenem beta-lactam (piperacillin/tazobactam or temocillin) treatment vs. meropenem treatment for ESBL-producing Enterobaceriaceae severe infection in ICU patients. Our hypothesis is that a non-carbapenem beta-lactam treatment is non-inferior to carbapenem treatment in patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae severe infection in the ICU.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
600
Piperacillin/tazobactam : 4.5 g by intravenous route every 6 hours (adjusted in case of renal failure). Temocillin : 6g/24 hours infused continuously by intravenous route after 2 g loading dose (adjusted in case of renal failure)
2 g every 8 hours by intravenous route (adjusted in case of renal failure)
LUYT Charles -Edouard
Paris, France
RECRUITINGMAYAUX Julien
Paris, France
RECRUITINGMortality
Time frame: Day 30
Mortality
Time frame: Day 90
Relapses rates of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase infection
Time frame: Day 30
Clinical failure rate
relapse of ESBL infection or death
Time frame: Day 30
Rate of antibiotic allergy
Time frame: Day 30
Incidence of adverse drug reactions
Time frame: Between randomization and Day 90
Duration of hospitalization stay
Time frame: Between randomization and Day 90
Duration of ICU stay
Time frame: Between randomization and Day 90
Number of days alive without antibiotics
Time frame: Between randomization and Day 30
Days with organ failure asessed by sequential organ failure assessment
Time frame: Between randomization and Day 30
Rate of faecal colonization with carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli
Time frame: End of treatment, ICU discharge and day 90
Rate of Clostridium difficile infection
Time frame: Day 90
Rate of secondary nosocomial infection
Time frame: Day 90
Proportion of patients in whom duration of antimicrobial treatment of the index episode has been exceeded compared to the recommended duration
Time frame: Through completion of study treatment, an average of 10 days and up to 21 days
Proportion of patients who change their treatment before the recommended duration without relapse
= cross-over
Time frame: Through completion of study treatment, an average of 10 days and up to 21 days
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.