Antibiotic Therapy Strategies for Treating Gram-Negative Severe Infections in the Critically Ill: A Narrative Review

Abstract

Introduction: Not enough data exist to inform the optimal duration and type of antimicrobial therapy against GN infections in critically ill patients. Methods: Narrative review based on a literature search through PubMed and Cochrane using the following keywords: “multi-drug resistant (MDR)”, “extensively drug resistant (XDR)”, “pan-drug-resistant (PDR)”, “difficult-to-treat (DTR) Gram-negative infection,” “antibiotic duration therapy”, “antibiotic combination therapy” “antibiotic monotherapy” “Gram-negative bacteremia”, “Gram-negative pneumonia”, and “Gram-negative intra-abdominal infection”. Results: Current literature data suggest adopting longer (≥10–14 days) courses of synergistic combination therapy due to the high global prevalence of ESBL-producing (45–50%), MDR (35%), XDR (15–20%), PDR (5.9–6.2%), and carbapenemases (CP)/metallo-β-lactamases (MBL)-producing (12.5–20%) Gram-negative (GN) microorganisms (i.e., Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumanii). On the other hand, shorter courses (≤5–7 days) of monotherapy should be limited to treating infections caused by GN with higher (≥3 antibiotic classes) antibiotic susceptibility. A general approach should be based on (i) third or further generation cephalosporins ± quinolones/aminoglycosides in the case of MDR-GN; (ii) carbapenems ± fosfomycin/aminoglycosides for extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs); and (iii) the association of old drugs with new expanded-spectrum β-lactamase inhibitors for XDR, PDR, and CP microorganisms. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in combination with minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), bactericidal vs. bacteriostatic antibiotics, and the presence of resistance risk predictors (linked to patient, antibiotic, and microorganism) should represent variables affecting the antimicrobial strategies for treating GN infections. Conclusions: Despite the strategies of therapy described in the results, clinicians must remember that all treatment decisions are dynamic, requiring frequent reassessments depending on both the clinical and microbiological responses of the patient.