Krebs Elizabeth D, Rakhit Shayan, Beavers Jennifer R, Atchison Leanne, Beyene Robel T
Division of Acute Care Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2025 Aug;26(6):435-440. doi: 10.1089/sur.2024.280. Epub 2025 Apr 4.
Protocols for vancomycin de-escalation often rely on nasal swab testing for methicillin-resistant (MRSA). However, in settings of hospital-wide universal MRSA decolonization with nasal mupirocin, these swabs may be unreliable, hindering de-escalation protocols. This study investigated vancomycin use and MRSA infection in trauma patients managed under each of these separate protocols. This retrospective review compared patients admitted to a Level 1 trauma center during a time-period of MRSA swab-based vancomycin de-escalation ("de-esc") with those admitted during a subsequent period of universal decolonization (and thus "no de-esc"). The primary outcome was total days of vancomycin per patient receiving vancomycin. Additional outcomes included a proportion of patients receiving a short course of vancomycin (<3 d), overall vancomycin rates, and in-hospital MRSA infections. A total of 5,678 patients were evaluated, with 2,891 admitted during the "de-esc" period and 2,787 admitted during universal decolonization ("no de-esc"). There was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving vancomycin during the "de-esc" versus "no de-esc" protocols (7.2% [n = 208] vs. 6.5% [n = 181], p = 0.3). Among these patients, there was also no difference in either total days of vancomycin (5.3 d vs. 5.9 d, p = 0.3) or proportion receiving a short vancomycin course (33% vs. 29%, p = 0.5). There were 56 total patients with MRSA infections, with no difference between the two time periods (1.1% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.07). Despite concerns that a hospital-wide MRSA universal decolonization policy would hinder nasal swab-based vancomycin de-escalation, both vancomycin use and MRSA infection rates remained the same during the two time periods.
万古霉素降阶梯治疗方案通常依赖于对耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)进行鼻拭子检测。然而,在全院采用鼻用莫匹罗星进行MRSA普遍去定植的情况下,这些拭子检测结果可能不可靠,从而阻碍降阶梯治疗方案的实施。本研究调查了在这两种不同方案下接受治疗的创伤患者中万古霉素的使用情况和MRSA感染情况。这项回顾性研究比较了在基于MRSA拭子检测的万古霉素降阶梯治疗(“降阶梯”)期间入住一级创伤中心的患者与随后在普遍去定植期间(因此是“无降阶梯”)入住的患者。主要结局是每位接受万古霉素治疗的患者使用万古霉素的总天数。其他结局包括接受短疗程万古霉素治疗(<3天)的患者比例、总体万古霉素使用率以及院内MRSA感染情况。总共评估了5678例患者,其中2891例在“降阶梯”期间入院,2787例在普遍去定植期间(“无降阶梯”)入院。在“降阶梯”与“无降阶梯”方案中,接受万古霉素治疗的患者比例没有差异(7.2% [n = 208] 对6.5% [n = 181],p = 0.3)。在这些患者中,万古霉素的总使用天数(5.3天对5.9天,p = 0.3)或接受短疗程万古霉素治疗的比例(33%对29%,p = 0.5)也没有差异。共有56例患者发生MRSA感染,两个时间段之间没有差异(1.1%对0.7%,p = 0.07)。尽管有人担心全院性的MRSA普遍去定植政策会阻碍基于鼻拭子检测的万古霉素降阶梯治疗,但在这两个时间段内,万古霉素的使用情况和MRSA感染率均保持不变。