Lec no 206 MDROs Dr Mohamad Hasan.pdf d d s. D. S s

MuhammadShayan99 96 views 126 slides Aug 29, 2025
Slide 1
Slide 1 of 126
Slide 1
1
Slide 2
2
Slide 3
3
Slide 4
4
Slide 5
5
Slide 6
6
Slide 7
7
Slide 8
8
Slide 9
9
Slide 10
10
Slide 11
11
Slide 12
12
Slide 13
13
Slide 14
14
Slide 15
15
Slide 16
16
Slide 17
17
Slide 18
18
Slide 19
19
Slide 20
20
Slide 21
21
Slide 22
22
Slide 23
23
Slide 24
24
Slide 25
25
Slide 26
26
Slide 27
27
Slide 28
28
Slide 29
29
Slide 30
30
Slide 31
31
Slide 32
32
Slide 33
33
Slide 34
34
Slide 35
35
Slide 36
36
Slide 37
37
Slide 38
38
Slide 39
39
Slide 40
40
Slide 41
41
Slide 42
42
Slide 43
43
Slide 44
44
Slide 45
45
Slide 46
46
Slide 47
47
Slide 48
48
Slide 49
49
Slide 50
50
Slide 51
51
Slide 52
52
Slide 53
53
Slide 54
54
Slide 55
55
Slide 56
56
Slide 57
57
Slide 58
58
Slide 59
59
Slide 60
60
Slide 61
61
Slide 62
62
Slide 63
63
Slide 64
64
Slide 65
65
Slide 66
66
Slide 67
67
Slide 68
68
Slide 69
69
Slide 70
70
Slide 71
71
Slide 72
72
Slide 73
73
Slide 74
74
Slide 75
75
Slide 76
76
Slide 77
77
Slide 78
78
Slide 79
79
Slide 80
80
Slide 81
81
Slide 82
82
Slide 83
83
Slide 84
84
Slide 85
85
Slide 86
86
Slide 87
87
Slide 88
88
Slide 89
89
Slide 90
90
Slide 91
91
Slide 92
92
Slide 93
93
Slide 94
94
Slide 95
95
Slide 96
96
Slide 97
97
Slide 98
98
Slide 99
99
Slide 100
100
Slide 101
101
Slide 102
102
Slide 103
103
Slide 104
104
Slide 105
105
Slide 106
106
Slide 107
107
Slide 108
108
Slide 109
109
Slide 110
110
Slide 111
111
Slide 112
112
Slide 113
113
Slide 114
114
Slide 115
115
Slide 116
116
Slide 117
117
Slide 118
118
Slide 119
119
Slide 120
120
Slide 121
121
Slide 122
122
Slide 123
123
Slide 124
124
Slide 125
125
Slide 126
126

About This Presentation

She. Ff d f. D f f f d. D d d d. D f d f e. F d. F. D. F d f d. F d. F e f. D f g ww. E w. S x. C. C z c. Xx. X. Cc c d. R. T r. R t.


Slide Content

ميحرلا نمحرلا الله مسب

MDROS ON A HOT TIN
Mohamed Hassan
Lecturer of pulmonary medicine
ZUH
November,2024

AGENDA
Introduction
Mechanisms of bacterial resistance
Bacterial resistance detection
Classification bacterial resistance
Egyptian guidelines for MDRO
Top 10 golden rules for antibiotics use
Alternative to antibiotics
Take home message.

Introduction
AMR (antibiotic multidrug resistance) is a serious public health problem, causing at least 1.27
million deaths worldwide annually and reportedly linked to more than 5 million deaths in
2019. In addition, it was reported that infections caused by 2.8 million resistant
microorganisms are seen in the U.S.A. every year.
 In the Antibiotic Resistance Threat Report published in 2019, it was stated that more than
35,000 deaths were associated with AMR. In addition, in the U.S.A., it was stated that the
deaths reached 48,000, with the addition of deaths due to Clostridium difficile diarrhea
associated with antibiotic use.
Globally, it is estimated that AMR-related deaths exceeded 1.2 million in 2019, and if
adequate measures are not taken, AMR might cause approximately 10 million deaths per
year by 2050

•The World Bank estimates that AMR could result in
US$ 1 trillion additional healthcare costs by 2050, and
US$ 1 trillion to US$ 3.4 trillion gross domestic product
(GDP) losses per year by 2030
.
•There is increasing evidence that the pandemic accelerated the
emergence and spread of AMR at least in hospital settings
particularly Acientobacter spp. Langford et al. reported that
more than 60% of patients with COVID-19 who had a
bacterial infection harbored a highly resistant organism

History of antibiotic
discovery and resistance

Median reported rates in 76 countries of 42% for third-
generation cephalosporin-resistant E. coli
and 35% for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus are a major concern.
For urinary tract infections caused by E. coli, 1 in 5
cases exhibited reduced susceptibility to standard
antibiotics like ampicillin, co-trimoxazole, and
fluoroquinolones in 2020.

The Antimicrobial Consumption Data in
Egypt
 Penicillins make up the majority of Egypt's antimicrobial
consumption;
products containing a combination of penicillins and beta-
lactamase inhibitors make up 29.3% of the antibacterials
used,
while macrolides make up 23.93%.

What are the mechanisms of bacterial
resistance?

Mechanism of resistance
Peptidoglycan
Outer membrane
Cell membrane
Gram positive
Antibiotic diffuse directly
through cell membrane``
Gram negative
ABx

ABx

Antibiotic diffuse through porins
because of thick outer membrane

Mechanism of resistance
Intrinsically resistance


independent to
previous Abx exposure
Acquired resistance

achieved through transfer
of genetic material that
confers resistance

Mechanism of resistance
Peptidoglycan
Outer membrane
Cell membrane
Gram positive Gram negative
Vancomycin is large molecule
cannot diffuse though the porin
Gram –ve is intrinsically resistant to
vancomycin
Vancomycin can diffuse through
cell wall of gram +ve
Vanc
o
Vanc
o vanco

ABx

Mechanism of resistance
Porin channel
Target site
1. Loss of porin
ABx

2.Change binding site

3.Efflux pump

4.Enzymatic modification
e.g. B-lactamases

•The observed sensitivity may depend on the number of
bacteria initially inoculated into the assay

•For colony count 10^5 the MIC may be < 4 however, when the
colony count increased to 10^7 the MIC > 128


Piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime may be
subjected to inoculum effect
Inoculum effect

Heteroresistance
Presence of subpopulations of bacterial cells with higher levels of antibiotic resistance than
those of the rest of the population in the same culture.

The resistance phenotype is often unstable, it can rapidly return to susceptibility.

 Its clinical relationship may be considerable, since more resistant subpopulations may be
selected during antibiotic therapy.

The use of nonstandard methods to define heteroresistance, which are costly and involve
considerable labor and resources, precludes evaluating the clinical magnitude and severity of
this phenomenon .
 Since heteroresistance may have serious implications in antibiotic therapy, the development
of standardized criteria and protocols for detecting and measuring heteroresistance is essential.

Antibiotic and microbiome
Antibiotic use can have unintended consequences on
commensal intestinal microbiota dysbiosis.

Whereas susceptible bacteria are destroyed, the resultant
ecologic vacuum promotes the overgrowth of pathogenic
bacteria that may already be antibiotic-resistant

Comparison of detection methods
of pneumonia pathogens

Risk factors of antibiotic resistance

Prediction the
risk of P.
aeruginosa
infection in
elderly CAP
patients

Risk factors for carbapenem-resistant
Klebsiella ... Giannella Score

EAT & TAT
Empiric antibiotic therapy is prescribed to treat known or suspected infections based on the
patient's symptoms and likely causative pathogens before definitive diagnostic test
results, including antibiotic susceptibility testing, are available.

 Targeted antibiotic therapy is initiated based on microbial identification and
susceptibility test results to identify the specific pathogen and ensure that the most effective
(ideally, also the most cost-effective), least toxic, and narrowest spectrum antibiotic is used as
therapy.

Bacterial resistance detection
Culture-based PCR-based
How can we detect the bacterial
resistance?

Methods of detection of
antiobiotic resistance

Conventional Cultures
Coupled with antimicrobial susceptibility testing, this traditional aetiologic diagnostic
approach requires approximately 48 h to 72 h from sample acquisition to result delivery
Culture methods may fail to detect important pathogens due to the administration of
empirical antibiotics or strict growth requirements.
It may be difficult to distinguish whether the detected organisms are colonisers or actual
pathogens

MIC & MBC
In order to obtain a therapeutic effect, the concentration at the site of infection
should exceed the MIC against the target bacteria for :

at least 40% of the dosing interval, and ideally longer (if killing is time-dependent)

 or by > ten folds (if killing is concentration-dependent)

Bacterial resistance detection
Culture-based
Disc diffusion
E test
Antibiotic A
Antibiotic B
Antibiotic C
Resistant
Intermediate
Sensitive
Antibiotic A sensitive MIC=1 mg/L

Bacterial resistance detection
Culture-based
Vancomycin
disc
diffusion
Vancomycin Vancomycin
Sensitive Sensitive MIC=1 mg/L
Patient A Patient B
Vancomycin
E test
Vancomycin Vancomycin
Sensitive Sensitive
Patient A Patient B
MIC=1.5 mg/L
Vancomycin can be used
Vancomycin can be
used
Vancomycin is better to
be avoided if
MIC≥1.5

Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-
of-flight mass spectrometry.
MALDI-TOF-MS provides microorganism identification, subtyping and antibiotic
susceptibility testing.

It is able to identify a large number of targets simultaneously and has been used to
reduce the time needed for microbial identification and strain typing

MALDI-TOF-MS is a protein/peptide-based diagnostic method that relies on the
molecular mass of all cellular proteins to determine the characteristic profile of the
pathogen

MALDI-TOF-MS
It requires only six minutes to identify each isolate

It can only use isolates from cultures; despite the initial cost to acquire the
equipment, it has been reported to be cost-effective

Although it allows for quick identification of the species involved (with rare exceptions
of poor discrimination or misidentifications between species with inherent
similarities), this is not always the case for the antibiotic susceptibility results.

Syndromic Rapid
Multi-Pathogen PCR
Panels

Bacterial resistance detection
PCR-based
Type of pathogen Resistant gene
Guide antimicrobial therapy

Applied directly to raw clinical samples, surpass the
stage of pathogen culturing and, therefore, expedite even
further, the time required for microbiological diagnosis
early administration of appropriate treatment or the
early switch from broad-spectrum empirical to
targeted antimicrobial
however, that the sensitivity of the current rapid test
bears the risk of leading to overuse of antibiotics.

BioFire
®
FilmArray
®
Pneumonia Panel (BPP) (FDA)-cleared syndromic rm-PCR that
simultaneously identifies 33 targets:
15 typical and 3 atypical bacterial pathogens, 8 respiratory viruses and
7 genetic markers of antimicrobial resistance in BAL/mini-BAL, tracheal aspirates and
expectorated sputum specimens
This assay requires two-minutes hands-on time and about one hour turn-around time,
therefore operating as a point-of-care test for rapid detection of NP pathogens

BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia Panel
plus
manufactured by the same company France , identifies the same targets along with
MERS-CoV virus
both panels provide semi-quantitative results for the 15 typical bacterial targets which
helps in the differentiation between colonisers and actual pathogens
BPP has an overall sensitivity of 96.2% and 96.3% and a specificity of 98.3% and
97.2% in BAL and sputum samples, respectively
It should be noted that the falsely positive samples for BPP, could be attributed to
negative cultures due to the administration of antibiotics therefore

Curetis Unyvero multiplex PCR
Panels, Germany
The Unyvero P55 Pneumonia panel, capable of
identifying 20 causative agents of lower respiratory
tract infections and 19 antibiotic resistance
determinants, was compared to routine
microbiological culture and antimicrobial resistance
diagnostics,
compared to BPP, Unyvero P55 assay was found to have
a lower sensitivity (63.8–88.8% vs. 98.5%) and take
longer for the sample-to-result time (5 h vs. 1 h)

Similarly, the RespiFinder
®
SMART 22
(PathoFinder
®
, Maastricht, Limburg, The
Netherlands) and VERIGENE
®
Respiratory
Pathogens Flex Test (Luminex
®
, Austin, Texas, USA)
detect only viral and atypical pathogens

GeneXpert®, USA
It helps identify mechanisms of resistance and is capable of delivering most test results
in one hour, including sample preparation time, faster than alternative technologies
such as enzyme immunoassays
Using advanced microfluidics, the process of nucleic acid extraction, amplification and
detection is performed within each single-use cartridge, minimising the risk of cross
contamination

The GeneXpert CarbaR is capable of detecting carbapenem resistance genes (K.
pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC), oxacillinase-type carbapenemase (OXA-48, OXA-181,
OXA-232),
 and metallo-beta-lactamases (MBLs) which include imipenemase MBL-1 (IMP), New
Delhi MBL (NDM) and Verona integron-encoded MBL(VIM)) within 48 min
The diagnostic performance of the GeneXpert CarbaR was evaluated using 408 rectal swabs
and found to have 100% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity, a positive predictive value of
53.6% and a negative predictive value of 100%

Hence, its use is limited by the narrow panel of detected genes and should be guided
by the local epidemiology of antimicrobial resistance profiles;
The performance and clinical utility of the GeneXpert CarbaR could be augmented by
the inclusion of more genes (e.g., OXA-23) and alleles of certain gene families (e.g.,
OXA-181)

Advantages of multiplex PCR
panels.
Exceptionally faster time to results for pathogen and resistance profiles: major utility for
prompt treatment modification and effective patient management
Multiple targets detection at the same and Detection of viral and atypical pathogens
as well
Detection of pathogens even when antimicrobial treatment has been initiated
Potential for better antibiotic utilisation and positive impact on:
-nosocomial pneumonia management, shortening hospital stay and decreasing healthcare
costs,-antibiotic stewardship programs
Early identification of MDR pathogens should facilitate enhanced infection control
practices and reduce spread

disadvantages of multiplex PCR
panels

Over-detection of microbial and viral genome: problem in results interpretation:
pathogen or coloniser?
The presence of a resistance gene marker may not be linked to the detected
microorganism, but to other co-existent organisms either undetectable or below the
detection limit
Initial cost to buy the equipment
Not widely available among different institutions yet

culture-based techniques
still necessary in many
cases

ELECTRONIC NOSE
-VOCS

an artificial sensor system consisting of a range of chemical
sensors that resemble biological olfactory receptors to detect
VOCs

 VOCs attach to the sensor polymer surface and induce swelling of
the polymer film, increasing the electrical resistance and
generating an electrical signal.
These signals can be classified into VOC signatures using
algorithms and a database of previously recorded VOC patterns.

Oxidative stress and inflammation, as well as invading microorganisms produce
specific compounds, which can induce alterations in the compositions of VOCs, leading
to distinct VOC profiles in exhaled breath.
 Exhaled breath samples were collected from ventilated patients directly before BAL was
performed, which were measured by gas chromatography-time -of-flight-mass
spectrometry (GC-tof-MS). This resulted in a set of 12 chemically diverse VOCs which
have the potential to determine the presence of VAP with sensitivity of 75.8% and
specificity of 73.0%
Although GC-tof-MS, the current gold standard, is a highly sensitive method to
accurately measure trace gases in exhaled air, it is time-consuming and carries a risk of
contamination, limiting its use as a point-of-care testing technology for VOC

Class A
Serine-beta-lactamase
Class C
Cephalosporinases
Class D
Oxacillinase
Beta-lactamases (Ambler classification)
Penicillinases
TEM and SHV
ESBL
CTX-M
Cabapenemases
KPC
Class B
Metallo-beta-lactamase
Cabapenemases
VIM, IMP, NDM
Cephalosporinases
AmpC
Cabapenemases
OXA-48

Carbapenemases/ β-Lactamases
Serine- β-Lactamases Metallo- β-Lactamases
Class A: KPC, IMI, SME, CTX-M
Class C: AmpC, ACT, CMY, DHA
Class D: OXA-48
Class B: NDM, VIM, IMP

Bacterial resistance detection
PCR-based
Klebsiella CTX-M
Type of pathogen Resistant gene
Avoid cephalosporin
and use carbapenem

Multi-resistant Gram-negative
bacilli
In 2008, the “ESKAPE” acronym was coined to name those bacteria that may
“escape” the effects of antibiotics including Enterococcus faecium,
Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii-
calcoaceticus complex, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter spp.
 The list of AMR bacteria is no longer up-to-date,
 as Escherichia coli,
Mycobacterium tuberculosis and
 Neisseria gonorrhoeae
 are currently among the most prevalent bacterial pathogens affected by
AMR issues.

Gram –ve
pathogens
Enterbacterals
Enterobacteriacae
Pseudomonas
aeruginosa
Acinetobacter
baumanii
•Klebsiella
•Ecoli
•Enterobacter
•Citrobacter
•Proteus
•Serratia

Gram –ve pathogen
Enterbacterals
Enterobacteriacae
Pseudomonas
aeruginosa
Acinetobacter
baumanii
Sensitive to carbapenem
and resistant to 3
rd gen
cephalosporin
Resistant to carbapenem
3
rd generation cephalosporin
resistant enterobacteriacae
(3GCephRE)
Carbapenem-resistant
enterobacteriacae
(CRE)
Resistant to carbapenem
Carbapenem-resistant
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
(CRPA)
Carbapenem-resistant
Acinetobacter Baumanii
(CRAB)
Resistant to carbapenem

ESBLE & MBL & difficult-to-treat
Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL)– transferable resistance to 3rd and 4th
generation cephalosporins, mostly found in E. coli, Klebsiella and Enterobacter species.

 Metallo-beta-lactamases (MBL) – similar to ESBL, but can also include resistance to
carbapenems, mostly found in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. - Carbapenemase-producing
Enterobacterales (formerly known as Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae),

Difficult-to-treat, based on non-susceptibility to “first-line” antibiotics,
generally beta-lactams or fluoroquinolones, that necessitates the use of
second-line, often more toxic, agents.

Difference between colonization and true infection
Colonization

It is the presence of bacteria on a body surface (like on the skin, mouth,
intestines or airway) without causing disease for the person.
Isolates were classified as colonization when no adverse clinical signs
or symptoms were documented.

Infection
It is the invasion of a host organism's bodily tissues by disease-causing
organisms. Infection also results from the interplay between pathogens
and the defenses of the hosts they infect.
Infections were defined by the presence of a major bacterial load
associated with clinical manifestations within the infection window
period (±3 days from specimen collection).

PUZZLE
- Method by which sample obtained
- Gram stain results
- Culture results
- Body temperature
- Radiographic findings
- Change in oxygenation or ventilation status
- Underlying medical conditions
- Results of white blood cell count &
differential
- General clinical condition

Fever
is not a sign of
antibiotic deficiency.

Diagnostic criteria for infections
Primary Blood Stream Infection : 2 percutaneous blood samples + eventual blood from
catheters
Fever/chills/hypotension + No further sign of localized infection
If Common Commensal organisms (i.e., diphtheroids (Corynebacterium spp. not C.
diphtheria), Bacillus spp. (not B. anthracis), Propionibacterium spp., coagulase-negative
staphylococci (including S. epidermidis), viridans group streptococci, Aerococcus spp.
Micrococcus spp. And Rhodococcus spp.): necessary two or more blood specimens drawn
on separate occasions.

Conclusions
Treatment decisions for suspected VAP or VAT should be tailored to clinical picture,
nature of the specimen, diagnostic confidence, balanced against the cost and risk of
worsening AMR.

Recommended treatment options
for infections due to (CRAB)
Resistance to at least anyone carbapenem (meropenem or imipenem).

Combination therapy with at least two active agents, is recommended
for the treatment of CRAB infections, even if a single agent demonstrates
activity, at least until clinical improvement is observed,

 In situations when prolonged durations of therapy may be needed (e.g.,
osteomyelitis), step-down therapy to a single active agent can be
considered.

Pneumonia: Recommended Treatment
Colistin + Meropenem +Ampicillin/sulbactam (even if non susceptible)

 Colistin + (Imipenem/cilastatin or Meropenem)

Colistin + Tigecycline + Ampicillin/Sulbactam

Consider concomitant administration of inhaled Colistin when it is used
intravenously for VAP
IDSA does not suggest the use of nebulized antibiotics as adjunctive
therapy for CRAB pneumonia, due to the lack of benefit observed in
clinical trials.

Bloodstream Infections: Recommended
Treatment
Colistin + Meropenem + Ampicillin/sulbactam. (for critically ill patients if
the local rate of MDR/carbapenem resistance > 10-15%).

 Colistin + (Imipenem/cilastatin or Meropenem).

Colistin + (Tigecycline OR Ampicillin/ Sulbactam)

ESBL
ESBLs are enzymes that inactivate most Penicillins, Cephalosporins, and
Aztreonam.
EBSL-E generally remains susceptible to Carbapenems.
Organisms carrying ESBL genes often harbor additional genes or mutations in
genes that mediate resistance to a broad range of antibiotics.

The antibiotics avoided empirically
Piperacillin tazobactam is not suggested for the treatment of infections outside
of the urinary tract caused by ESBL-E

if cefepime or piperacillin tazobactam Were initiated as empiric therapy for
uncomplicated cystitis caused by an ESBL-E and clinical improvement occurs,
no change or extension of antibiotic therapy is necessary.

The active antimicrobial agents
• Carbapenems
• Ciprofloxacin
• Levofloxacin
• Trimethoprim sulfamethoxazole
• Gentamicin
• Piperacillin/tazobactam (only for UTI)

Carbapenemases/ β-Lactamases
Serine- β-Lactamases Metallo- β-Lactamases
Class A: KPC, IMI, SME, CTX-M
Class C: AmpC, ACT, CMY, DHA
Class D: OXA-48
Class B: NDM, VIM, IMP

Class A
Serine-beta-lactamase
Class C
Cephalosporinases
Class D
Oxacillinase
Beta-lactamases (Ambler classification)
Penicillinases
TEM and SHV
ESBL
CTX-M
Cabapenemases
KPC
Class B
Metallo-beta-lactamase
Cabapenemases
VIM, IMP, NDM
Cephalosporinases
AmpC
Cabapenemases
OXA-48

CRE
Members of the Enterobacterales resistant to at least one Carbapenem antibiotic or
producing a carbapenemase enzyme.
 Carbapenamases enzymes, belong to Ambler class A, B or D beta-lactamases.
CRE : These include
 serine b-lactamases Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) (Ambler class A),
 metallo-blactamase (MBL) including
 New Delhi MBL (NDM) Verona integron-encoded MBL (VIM), imipenemase (IMP)
(Ambler class B)
 and OXA-48-like carbapenemases (Ambler class D).

 KPCs hydrolyse penicillins, cephalosporins, monobactams and carbapenems.


KPC, NDM and OXA-48 enzymes are among the carbapenem resistance mechanisms of
greatest concern.

The drugs of choice for
treatment of CRE:
Tigecycline,
Aminoglycosides
and Colistin
Infections caused by Enterobacterales isolates
without carbapenemase production that remain
susceptible to Meropenem and Imipenem (i.e.,
MICs ≤1 μg/mL)

 but are not susceptible to Ertapenem (i.e., MICs ≥1
μg/mL)
 → the use of extended infusion Meropenem (or
Imipenem - cilastatin) is suggested.

For patients with CRE infections who within the previous 12
months have received medical care in countries with a relatively
high prevalence of metallo-β-lactamase-producing organisms or
who have previously had a clinical or surveillance culture where a
metalo- β-lactamase (NDM, VIM, IMP) producing isolate was
identified,

preferred treatment options include the combination of:

Ceftazidime-avibactam plus Aztreonam.

The active antibiotics against CRE:
Serine- β-Lactamases
 Ceftazidime-avibactam
 Tigecycline (only for infections not
involving the bloodstream or urinary
tract)

Meropenem MIC
Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae
CRE
MIC ≤ 8 or unknown
High dose
Meropenem-based
combination
MIC > 8
Are New BLBLIs susceptible in vitro
Yes
No
Are they available
Combination without
adding meropenem
Yes No
Use new BLBLIs
without combination

Pseudomonas aeruginosa
• In 2018, the concept of “difficult-to-treat” resistance was proposed which
is defined as P. aeruginosa exhibiting non-susceptibility to all the following:
 piperacillin-tazobactam,
ceftazidime, cefepime,
aztreonam, meropenem , imipenem-cilastatin,
ciprofloxacin, and levofloxacin.
Carbapenem resistant PA (CRPA): Resistance to at least anyone carbapenem
(meropenem or imipenem).

Any clinical syndrome due Pseudomonas
aeruginosa
• When P. aeruginosa isolates test susceptible to both non carbapenem β-lactam
agents (i.e., piperacillin tazobactam, ceftazidime, cefepime, aztreonam) and carbapenems,
 the non carbapenem β-lactam agents are preferred over carbapenem therapy.

 If the isolate remains susceptible to a traditional non-carbapenem β-lactam (e.g., cefepime)
on repeat testing, it is recommended to administer the non-carbapenem agent as high-dose
extended infusion therapy (e.g., cefepime 2 g IV every 8 hours, infused over at least 3
hours)

Any clinical syndrome due to CRPA
susceptible to other antimicrobial agents
Use one of the following antibiotics:
• Piperacillin/tazobactam
• Ceftazidime
• Cefepime
• Ciprofloxacin
• Levofloxacin
• Amikacin (only if urinary tract infection)

For critically ill patients or those with poor source control with P. aeruginosa
isolates resistant to carbapenems but susceptible to traditional
βlactams,
use of a novel β-lactam agent that tests susceptible (e.g., ceftolozane-
tazobactam & ceftazidime-avibactam) is a reasonable treatment approach.

• Combination of two agents from different classes with in vitro activity against P.
aeruginosa for empiric treatment of serious infections known or suspected to be caused by P.
aeruginosa in the following conditions:
1. When signs of severe sepsis or septic shock are present
2. Neutropenic patients with bacteremia
3. Burn patients (who have a high incidence of multidrug-resistant P. aeruginosa infections) with
serious infections.
4. In other settings where the incidence of resistance to the chosen antibiotic class is high (e.g.,
>10 to 15 %)

CRPA

For patients with severe
infections caused by CRPA
susceptible in vitro only to
Colistin or
aminoglycosides a
combination therapy is
suggested.
Colistin plus other agent to
which organism has
demonstrated susceptible
MIC.

Any clinical syndrome due to DTRPA
• Ceftolozane/tazobactam (preferred empirical choice in absence of concomitant risk of CRE)
• Ceftazidime/avibactam
• Colistin + (Imipenem/cilastatin OR Meropenem)
• Combination of Colistin, Tigecycline, Aminoglycosides.
• (Colistin or Aminoglycoside) + (Carbapenem and/or tigecycline)

Spectrum of activity of novel
antibiotics
ESBL AmpC

KPC OXA MBL Carb-R
A.B.
MRSA
Ceftolozane/tazobact
am
+ +/− − − − − −
Ceftazidime/avibacta
m

++
+ + + - - -
Meropenem/vaborba
ctam
+ + + - - - -
Ceftobiprol medocaril - - - - - - +
Telavancin - - - - - - +

Vancomycin-
resistant
Enterococci
(VRE)
Clinical Syndrome Recommended Treatment
Pneumonia Linezolid
Bloodstream infections Linezolid OR (Daptomycin +/-
Carbapenem)
Complicated intraabdominal
infections
Linezolid OR Tigecycline
Complicated urinary tract
infections
Linezolid OR Daptomycin

Suggested
dosing of
antibiotics
Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Amikaci
n
Uncomplicated cystitis: 15
mg/kg IV as a single dose
Any clinical syndrome due to
CRPA susceptible to other
antimicrobial agents:15mg/kg

All other infections: 20
mg/kg IV once;
subsequent doses and dosing
interval based on
pharmacokinetic evaluation.
N.B., Use adjusted body
weight for patients
.120% of ideal body weight
for aminoglycoside
dosing.
ESBL-E, AmpC-E,
CRE, DTR-P.
aeruginosa

Ampicillin/sulb
actam

Agent Adult dose Target
Organis
m
Ampicillin/sulbac
tam
Total daily dose of 6-9 grams of
sulbactam
Potential infusion strategies
include the
following:
- 9 grams of ampicillin-
sulbactam (6 grams’
ampicillin, 3 grams sulbactam)
IV every 8 hours, infused over 4
hours
- 27 grams of ampicillin-
sulbactam (18 grams’
ampicillin, 9 grams sulbactam)
IV as a continuous infusion
CRAB

Ampicillin/sulbactam

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Ampicillin/sulbactam For mild infections caused by CRAB
isolates
susceptible to ampicillin-sulbactam,
particularly
if intolerance or toxicities preclude the use
of higher dosages.
- 3 grams of ampicillin-sulbactam (2
grams
ampicillin, 1-gram sulbactam) IV every 4
hours, infused over 30 minutes

Cefepime
Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Cefepime Uncomplicated cystitis: 1gram IV
every 8
hours, infused over 30 minutes
All other infections: 2 grams IV
every 8 hours, infused
over 3 hours (if possible)
AmpC-E, CRPA

Agent

Adult dose

Target Organism

Aztreonam 2g IV over 3 h /6h DTR-PA
Ceftazidime Any clinical syndrome due to
CRPA susceptible to other
antimicrobial agents: 2 g IV
q8h
CRPA
Ceftazidime/avibactam 2.5 grams IV every 8 hours,
infused over 3 hours
CRE, DTR-P. aeruginosa
Ertapenem 1 gram IV every 24 hours,
infused over 30 minutes
ESBL-E, AmpC-E

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Ceftazidime/avibactam
PLUS Aztreonam
Ceftazidime-avibactam: 2.5
grams IV every 8 hours,
infused over 3 hours.
PLUS
Aztreonam: 2 grams IV every
6-8 hours (every 6-hour dosing
preferred if possible), infused
over 3 hours.
Administered at the same
time as ceftazidime
avibactam
Metallo-β-lactamase
producing
CRE

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Ceftolozane/tazobactam Cystitis: 1.5 grams IV every 8
hours, infused
over 1 hour
All other infections: 3 grams
IV every 8 hours, infused over
3 hours
DTR-P. aeruginosa
ESBL-E
Ciprofloxacin Cystitis: 400 mg IV every 12
hours or 500 mg
PO every 12 hours
All other infections: 400 mg
IV every 8 hours
OR 750 mg PO every 12 hours
ESBL-E, AmpC-E,
CRPA

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Colistin Colistin IV 2.5 mg/kg
Colistin Base Activity
(CBA) IV loading dose,
then 1.5 mg/kg CBA
over 1 hour IV /12 h
CRE,
DTR-P. aeruginosa,
CRAB
Colistin inhalation Colistin inhalation 75 to
150 mg CBA twice
daily.
Daptomycin IV 8-12mg/kg/day VRE

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Gentamicin Uncomplicated cystitis: 5 mg/kg/dose IV as a
single dose
All other infections: 7 mg/kg IV once;
subsequent doses and dosing interval based on
pharmacokinetic evaluation.
ESBL-E, AmpC-E,
CRE, DTRP.
aeruginosa
Imipenem-cilastatin Uncomplicated cystitis (standard infusion):
500 mg IV every 6 hours, infused over 30
minutes.
All other ESBL-E or AmpC-E infections: 500
mg IV every 6 hours, infused over 30 minutes.
All other CRE and CRAB infections: 500 mg IV
every 6 hours, infused over 3 hours
ESBL-E, AmpC-E,
CRE, CRAB, DTR PA

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Levofloxacin 750 mg IV/PO every 24 hours. ESBL-E, AmpC-E,
S. maltophilia,
CRPA
Linezolid 600 mg IV every 12 hours. VRE
Metronidazole Complicated intraabdominal infections: 500 mg/
6h
Meropenem Uncomplicated cystitis (standard infusion): 1
grams IV every 8 hours, infused over 30
minutes.
All other ESBL-E or AmpC-E infections: 1–2 g
IV q8h, infused over 30 minutes.

All other CRE and CRAB infections: 2 g IV every
8 hours, infused over 3 hours

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Nitrofurantoin Macrocrystal/monohydr
ate: 100 mg PO every
12 hours.
ESBL-E cystitis,
AmpC-E cystitis
Piperacillin-
tazobactam
Any clinical syndrome
due to CRPA susceptible
to other antimicrobial
agents: 4.5 g IV loading
over 30 minutes then, 4
hrs later, start 4.5gmIV
over 4 hours and then
repeat every 8 hours over
4 hours.

Agent Adult dose Target Organism
Tigecycline 200 mg IV as a single dose, then
100 mg IV
every 12 hours
CRE, CRAB, S.
maltophilia
Trimethoprim -
sulfamethoxazole
Cystitis: 160 mg (trimethoprim
component) PO
Q12h
Other infections: 8–12 mg/kg/day
(trimethoprim component) PO
divided every 8–
12 hours (consider maximum dose
of 960 mg
trimethoprim component per day).
ESBL-E, AmpC-E,
S. maltophilia

NP (HAP and/or VAP):
Dosage and Treatment
Duration for NP
Other Approved
Indications

Ceftolozane/tazobacta
m
HAP and VAP
Dosage: 3 g (2/1) every 8 h
(h), 1-h IV infusion,
(Note: double dose compared to
other indications)
Duration: 8–14 days (d)
complicate intra-
abdominal infection
cUTIs (including acute
pyelonephritis)

NP (HAP and/or VAP):
Dosage and Treatment
Duration for NP
Other Approved
Indications
Ceftazidime/aviba
ctam
HAP and VAP, including
bacteraemic cases
(bacteraemia associated with
or suspected to be associated
with HAP/VAP)
Dosage: 2.5 g (2/0.5) every
8 h, 2-h IV infusion
Duration: 7–14 d
cIAI (in combination with
metronidazole),
cUTI (including
pyelonephritis),
Bacteraemia associated with
or suspected to be associated
with cIAI or cUTI
Infections due to aerobic
Gram-negative organisms in
patients with limited
treatment options

NP (HAP and/or VAP):
Dosage and Treatment
Duration for NP
Other Approved Indications
Meropenem/v
aborbactam
HAP and VAP, including
bacteraemic cases
(bacteraemia associated
with or suspected to be
associated with HAP/VAP)
1
Dosage: 4 g (2/2) every 8
h, 3-h IV infusion
Duration: 7–14 d
cIAI
cUTI (including
pyelonephritis),
Bacteraemia associated
with or suspected to be
associated with cIAI or cUTI
Infections due to aerobic
Gram-negative organisms in
patients with limited
treatment option

NP (HAP and/or VAP):
Dosage and Treatment
Duration for NP
Other Approved
Indications
Ceftobiprole
medocaril
HAP (not for VAP)
1
Dosage: 500 mg every 8 h,
2-h IV infusion
Duration: 7–14 d
CAP

NP (HAP and/or VAP):
Dosage and Treatment
Duration for NP
Other Approved Indications
Telavancin HAP and VAP caused by S.
aureus including
bacteraemic cases (when no
alternative treatment
available)
2
Dosage: 10 mg/kg every 24
h, 1-h IV infusion
Duration: 7–21 d
complicated skin and skin
structures infection caused by S.
aureus including bacteraemic
cases (when no alternative
treatment available)

No action today means

no cure tomorrow.

Prevention is
better than
treatment

The five
moments
for hand
hygiene

Prescribing antibiotics when they
are truly needed
Appropriate evaluation requires obtaining a culture from these sites only when indicated,
without contamination by the collection protocol itself (superficial swab cultures and
cultures of drains and sinus tracts are inappropriate),
Avoiding antibiotic treatment of a “positive”
culture result without symptoms and signs of
active infection.

Selecting the most appropriate antibiotic(s)
for a specific patient

Optimization of th Dosing Regimens in
MDR Infections
Prolonged/Continuous Infusion of Beta-Lactams
The prolonged IV administration of antibiotics can increase the time above the MIC target.
Furthermore, the continuous administration of BL such as piperacillin/tazobactam and
meropenem showed a reduction in clinical failures compared to an intermittent
administration.

Combination Therapy
Faster bacterial clearance, prevention of the development of bacterial resistance and
synergistic or additive effects have been advocated to support the combination therapy,

 In the presence of A. baumannii, the combination of colistin and
amikacin was most effective for the eradication of persister cells

 potential side effects like increased toxicity and higher costs are possible drawbacks.

Handle antibiotics

Value of Antibiograms
Antibiograms represent an important tool to provide
empirical antibiotics recommendations and are a core
element of antimicrobial stewardship programs by increasing
the likelihood of appropriate initial antimicrobial coverage.
 Regional cumulative antibiograms have been shown to be
feasible and may inform an empirical antibiotic selection for
institutions where local surveillance data are missing. They
may also be valuable to assist targeted antimicrobial
stewardship interventions.

Oral antibiotic administration has been shown to decrease the cost and length of
hospitalization.
 The general guidance for the timing of intravenous-to-oral switching of antibiotics provided
the gastrointestinal tract is functional, and clinical improvement with or without
improvement in laboratory markers.
the switch to oral antibiotics should not lead to an antibiotic therapy which is longer than
that used for parenteral therapy.
Actually, it is increasingly evident that prescribing oral antibiotics could influence gut
microbiome dynamics, promoting more strongly AMR

Achieving source control by identifying
and eliminating the source of the
infection or reducing the bacterial load

vaccines, antibodies, pattern recognition receptors (PRRs),
probiotics, bacteriophages, peptides, phytochemicals, metals
and antimicrobial enzymes

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Appropriate use of antibiotics should be integral to good clinical
practice and standards of care.
 Inappropriate antibiotic use are contributing to the development
and spread of AMR.
 Antibiotics should be treated as a global public good on the
limit of shortage;
Infections, especially those with MDR bacteria, compromise the
success of all medical practitioners, including surgeons.
Tags