Study setting
This was a prospective observational multicenter cohort study conducted in Korea. Eight hospitals with 580‒915 beds participated in the study, from September 1, 2017, to August 31, 2018. Participating hospitals were located throughout the Korean peninsula, with most being university-affiliated hospitals (seven out of the eight hospitals). The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Hanyang University Seoul Hospital (IRB number: 2017-07-009) and the IRB of each hospital. Written informed consent was obtained from the patients by the researchers at each hospital.
Patient population
All adult patients (aged ≥19 years) with CA-APN admitted to participating hospitals were recruited. The inclusion criteria were fever (body temperature ≥37.8℃) with the fulfillment of at least three of the following criteria: ⅰ) flank pain; ⅱ) costovertebral angle tenderness; ⅲ) symptoms of lower UTI, such as dysuria, urgency, frequency, and suprapubic pain; ⅳ) pyuria (≥5‒9 white blood cells [WBCs] per high power field); and v) leukocytosis (WBC count >11600/mm³ or polymorphonuclear cells plus bands >65%) [14, 15]. CA-APN was defined as a case presenting to the emergency department or an outpatient department from the community with signs of APN as previously described. Patients diagnosed with APN >48 h after admission, those transferred from other hospitals, who had other reasons for fever and pyuria, with insufficient data, or pregnant women were excluded from the study. Furthermore, patients with prolonged hospitalization (≥ 21 days) due to medical problems not associated with APN treatment, or those whose entire treatment progress had not been observed, were also excluded.
Clinical data
We collected clinical data on demographic features (age and sex), clinical features, clinical outcomes, and medical costs. To assess outcomes, we recorded the length of hospital stay and clinical failure rate. Clinical failure was defined as death or recurrence of APN within 14 days of completing therapy. For the analysis of medical costs, the costs incurred during hospitalization were extracted from the hospital’s financial database. It consisted of costs such as consultation fees, hospitalization expenditures, meals, cost per medication, procedure or operation charges, laboratory examination charges, and radiologic examination charges. Non-reimbursed medical costs were excluded. All costs are presented in USD (1 USD = 1,100 KRW).
Microbiological data
We analyzed results of the urine and blood culture tests performed at the time of admission. The presence of etiologic agents was confirmed when microorganisms at a concentration of ≥ 105 CFU/mL were isolated from urine cultures and/or when urinary pathogens were isolated from blood cultures. Identification of bacterial species and their susceptibility to antibiotics were determined using a semi-automated system (VITEK, bioMérieux, Hazelwood, MO, USA or Microscan, Dade Behring, West Sacramento, CA, USA) in each hospital. The breakpoints of each compound were defined with reference to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute [16], and the breakpoints of R (resistance) or I (intermediate) were considered to indicate resistance. If the causative organism was resistant to ciprofloxacin and/or levofloxacin, we defined it as resistant to fluoroquinolones.
Definition of the appropriateness of antibiotic use
The appropriateness of the use of empirical and definitive antibiotics was classified as ‘optimal,’ ‘suboptimal,’ and ‘inappropriate;’ ‘optimal’ and ‘suboptimal’ were regarded as ‘appropriate’ antibiotic use.
The standard for the classification of empirical antibiotics was defined based on the ‘Clinical Practice Guideline for the Antibiotic Treatment of Community-Acquired Urinary Tract Infections’ which is the national clinical practice guideline in Korea [8]. The ‘optimal’ empirical antibiotic use was defined when the empirical antibiotics for CA-APN were second to fourth generation cephalosporins, aminoglycosides, β-lactamase/β-lactamase inhibitors, or fluoroquinolones, regardless of the severity of APN or history of patients. As for carbapenem use, we considered it to be an ‘optimal’ empirical antibiotic use when carbapenem was administered to patients with signs of septic shock (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg or mental change), a history of antibiotic treatment, or a history of hospitalization within 1 year [17]. The use of carbapenem in the other cases was regarded as ‘suboptimal’ empirical antibiotic use. The antibiotics not included in the ‘optimal’ or ‘suboptimal’ empirical antibiotic use groups for CA-APN were defined as ‘inappropriate.’
The standard for the classification of definitive antibiotics was defined according to the results of the in vitro susceptibility test for causative organisms. Cases without the result of the causative organism or those with multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa—not susceptible to all antibiotics—as the causative pathogen, were excluded. We compared the antibiotics used on the 5th day after urine and/or blood cultures were prepared with the results of the antimicrobial susceptibility test. The ranks of the spectrum of β-lactam and anti-staphylococcal antibiotics are shown in Table 1 [18]. Rank 1 was defined as the narrowest antibiotic, and rank 3 was defined as the broadest antibiotic.
‘Optimal’ definitive antibiotic use was considered when the causative organisms were susceptible to the antibiotic used on the 5th day. As for the β-lactam and anti-staphylococcal antibiotics, we considered them as ‘optimal’ definitive antibiotics when the causative organism was not ‘susceptible’ to narrower-spectrum antibiotics and ‘suboptimal’ when the causative organism was ‘susceptible’ to narrower-spectrum antibiotics. If the antibiotic used on the 5th day was not susceptible to the causative organism, we defined it as an ‘inappropriate’ definitive antibiotic.
Combining the appropriateness of the empirical and definitive antibiotic use, ‘optimal’ antibiotic use was considered when both empirical and definitive antibiotic use was ‘optimal;’ ‘inappropriate’ was considered when at least one of the empirical or definitive antibiotics was ‘inappropriate;’ and ‘suboptimal’ included the remaining cases.
To evaluate the appropriateness of the route of administration, we reviewed the clinical status of patients with a causative organism susceptible to antibiotics capable of oral route administration such as fluoroquinolone, third generation cephalosporin, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. The criteria for eligibility to use oral antibiotics were as follows: i) normal WBC count (4500–11000/µL) and ii) normal body temperature (36.1‒37.2°C) on day 7 of hospitalization [19]. ‘Appropriate’ oral antibiotic use was considered when patients who met the abovementioned criteria used oral antibiotics on the 7th day of hospitalization, and ‘inappropriate’ oral antibiotic use was considered when patients who met the criteria did not use oral antibiotics on the 7th day of hospitalization.
Regarding the duration of antibiotic use, ‘prolonged’ antibiotic duration was defined as >14 days for simple APN cases; >14 days from the procedure for complicated APN cases; and >28 days for renal abscess, cyst infection, and emphysematous pyelonephritis cases [7].
Statistical analyses
Clinical outcomes were compared between patients who were administered antibiotics ‘appropriately’ and ‘inappropriately.’ All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 21 for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Categorical variables were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test, and continuous variables were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney test. We also performed a propensity-score matching analysis with a matching weight of 1:2 to reduce the effects of confounding factors. Age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and Pitt bacteremia score were included in the model, and non-matched cases were discarded for the subanalysis. Statistical significance was set at a two-tailed P-value < 0.05.