Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of a Dynamic Microbiological Environment on the Clinical Efficacy of Ertapenem and Piperacillin/Tazobactam in the Treatment of Complicated Community-Acquired Intra-Abdominal Infection in Spain: A Cost-Consequence Analysis

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and Objective

The microbial susceptibility of many antibiotics has been affected by prescribing patterns and their extensive use. The purpose of this evaluation was to assess how these changes could affect the initial efficacy of ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) acquired in the community and the potential consequences this may have in healthcare costs in Spain.

Methods

The Initial efficacy of ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam for patients with APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) II scores <10 was extracted from a multicenter randomized study and were combined with the current microbial susceptibilities obtained from the SMART study, a multinational surveillance program. Country-specific pathogens distribution was extracted from a national study in patients with community-acquired IAI. The estimated effectiveness was used in a decision-analytic model to compare total costs between ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated IAI. The model performs extensive one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

The model suggested a savings of €209 (year 2012 values) per patient when complicated IAIs acquired in the community (APACHE II <10) were treated with ertapenem instead of piperacillin/tazobactam. One-way sensitivity analyses showed length of stay as the key driver parameter. Further analysis of this parameter and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of our evaluation, with a 58 % likelihood of ertapenem being dominant.

Conclusions

Ertapenem appears to be a cost-saving strategy over piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of patients with complicated IAIs acquired in the community in Spain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Christou NV, Turgeon P, Wassef R, et al. Management of intra-abdominal infections. The case for intraoperative cultures and comprehensive broad-spectrum antibiotic coverage. Arch Surg. 1996;131:1193–201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tellado JM, Sen SS, Caloto MT, et al. Consequences of inappropriate initial empiric parenteral antibiotic therapy among patients with community-acquired intra-abdominal infections in Spain. Scand J Infect Dis. 2007;39(11–12):947–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Solomkin JS, Mazuski JE, Bradley JS, et al. Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection in adults and children: guidelines by the Surgical Infection Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(2):133–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Guirao X, Arias J, Badía JM, García-Rodríguez JA, Mensa J, Alvarez-Lerma F, et al. Recommendations in the empiric anti-infective agents of intra-abdominal infection. Cir Esp. 2010;87(2):63–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gin A, Dilay L, Karlowsky JA, et al. Piperacillin-tazobactam: a beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combination. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2007;5(3):365–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Solomkin JS, Yellin AE, Rotstein OD, Protocol 017 Study Group, et al. Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections: results of a double-blind, randomized comparative phase III trial. Ann Surg. 2003;237(2):235–45.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hawser SP, Bouchillon SK, Hoban DJ, et al. Epidemiologic trends, occurrence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase production, and performance of ertapenem and comparators in patients with intra-abdominal infections: analysis of global trend data from 2002–2007 from the SMART study. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2010;11(4):371–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cantón R, Loza E, Aznar J, SMART-Spain Working Group, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative organisms from intra-abdominal infections and evolution of isolates with extended spectrum β-lactamases in the SMART study in Spain (2002–2010). Rev Esp Quimioter. 2011;24(4):223–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Qvist N, Warren B, Leister-Tebbe H, et al. Efficacy of tigecycline versus ceftriaxone plus metronidazole for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections: results from a randomized, controlled trial. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2012;13(2):102–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Prasad P, Sun J, Danner RL, et al. Excess deaths associated with tigecycline after approval based on non-inferiority trials. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(12):1699–709.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. EMA. Questions and answers on the review of Tygacil (tigecycline). Outcome of a renewal procedure. 2011. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Medicine_QA/human/000644/WC500102228.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  12. FDA. Drug Safety Communication. Increased risk of death with Tygacil (tigecycline) compared to other antibiotics used to treat similar infections. 2010. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm224370.htm. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  13. Dietrich ES, Schubert B, Ebner W, et al. Cost efficacy of tazobactam/piperacillin versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infection. Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(1):79–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tubau F, Liñares J, Rodríguez MD, et al. Susceptibility to tigecycline of isolates from samples collected in hospitalized patients with secondary peritonitis undergoing surgery. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010;66(3):308–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gobernado M, Sanz-Rodríguez C, Villanueva R, et al. In vitro activity of ertapenem against clinical bacterial isolates in 69 Spanish medical centers (E-test study). Rev Esp Quimioter. 2007;20(4):395–408.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mayne D, Dowzicky MJ. In vitro activity of tigecycline and comparators against organisms associated with intra-abdominal infections collected as part of TEST (2004–2009). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;74(2):151–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Joly-Guillou ML, Kempf M, Cavallo JD, et al. Comparative in vitro activity of Meropenem, Imipenem and Piperacillin/tazobactam against 1071 clinical isolates using 2 different methods: a French multicentre study. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;10:72.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cuevas O, Cercenado E, Goyanes MJ, et al. Staphylococcus spp. in Spain: present situation and evolution of antimicrobial resistance (1986–2006) [in Spanish]. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2008;26(5):269–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Treviño M, Areses P, Peñalver MD, et al. Susceptibility trends of Bacteroides fragilis group and characterization of carbapenemase-producing strains by automated REP-PCR and MALDI TOF. Anaerobe. 2012;18(1):37–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Seifert H, Dalhoff A, PRISMA Study Group. German multicentre survey of the antibiotic susceptibility of Bacteroides fragilis group and Prevotella species isolated from intra-abdominal infections: results from the PRISMA study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(11):2405–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jansen JP, Kumar R, Carmeli Y. Cost-effectiveness evaluation of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections accounting for antibiotic resistance. Value Health. 2009;12(2):234–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jansen JP, Kumar R, Carmeli Y. Accounting for the development of antibacterial resistance in the cost effectiveness of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of diabetic foot infections in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(12):1045–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Krobot K, Yin D, Zhang Q, et al. Effect of inappropriate initial empiric antibiotic therapy on outcome of patients with community-acquired intra-abdominal infections requiring surgery. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004;23(9):682–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer EAM. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(4):CD001546. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001546.pub2.

  25. Spanish Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality, Institute for Health Information. CMBD Minimum Basis Data Set. 2011. http://pestadistico.msc.es. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  26. Spanish Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality. Institute for Health Information. Diagnosis Related Group costs in Spain. http://www.msssi.gob.es/estadEstudios/estadisticas/docs/SNS2011_PESOS_COSTES_AP27_DEF.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  27. Spanish General Council of Official Colleges of Pharmacists. Bot PLUS 2.0. https://botplusweb.portalfarma.com/. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  28. Royal decree-law 8/2010, of May 20, on extraordinary measures to reduce Government deficit (RDL 8/2010). http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/05/24/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-8228.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  29. Doern GV, Brecher SM. The clinical predictive value (or lack thereof) of the results of in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility tests. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49(9):S11–4.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Fortaleza CM, Freire MP, FilhoDde C, et al. Risk factors for recovery of imipenem- or ceftazidime-resistant pseudomonas aeruginosa among patients admitted to a teaching hospital in Brazil. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27(9):901–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Goldstein EJ, Citron DM, Peraino V, et al. Introduction of ertapenem into a hospital formulary: effect on antimicrobial usage and improved in vitro susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(12):5122–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dinubile MJ, Friedland I, Chan CY, et al. Bowel colonization with resistant gram-negative bacilli after antimicrobial therapy of intra-abdominal infections: observations from two randomized comparative clinical trials of ertapenem therapy. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;24(7):443–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kollef MH. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment: an important determinant of outcome for hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;31(Suppl 4):S131–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sáez-Castillo AJ, Olmo-Jiménez MJ, Pérez Sánchez JM, et al. Bayesian analysis of nosocomial infection risk and length of stay in a department of general and digestive surgery. Value Health. 2010;13(4):431–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Koperna T, Semmler D, Marian F. Risk stratification in emergency surgical patients: is the APACHE II score a reliable marker of physiological impairment? Arch Surg. 2001;136(1):55–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Namias N, Solomkin JS, Jensen EH, et al. Randomized, multicenter, double-blind study of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of intravenous ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized adults. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2007;8(1):15–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The study described in this article was sponsored by Merck & Co., Inc. The study sponsor played a significant role in the analysis and interpretation of data. Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), a consultant company specialized in economic evaluation of health interventions, was hired by Merck & Co., Inc. to collect the data, conduct the analysis, and write the manuscript. S. Grau, V. Lozano, A. Valladares, and R. Cavanillas have participated in acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data and have been involved in drafting and reviewing the manuscript. G. Nocea has participated in the study design and interpretation of data and has been involved in reviewing the manuscript. Y. Xie has participated in the study design and has reviewed the manuscript. The final version submitted for publication was approved by all authors. A. Valladares acts as guarantor for the overall content. The authors thank Miguel Ángel Casado (PhD; medical writer) and Itziar Oyagüez (BA; medical writer), employees of PORIB, for their assistance with the preparation of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

S. Grau has received honoraria for speaking at symposia organized on behalf of Pfizer, Astellas, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Novartis. V. Lozano has served as an external consultant for Merck Sharp & Dohme. A. Valladares, R. Cavanillas, Y. Xie, and G. Nocea are current employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hospital del Mar, Passeig Marítim 25-29, 08003, Barcelona, Spain

    Santiago Grau

  2. Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Iberia, Madrid, Spain

    Virginia Lozano

  3. Outcomes Research, Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd, Madrid, Spain

    Amparo Valladares & Gonzalo Nocea

  4. Medical Affairs, Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd, Madrid, Spain

    Rafael Cavanillas

  5. Global Health Outcomes, Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA

    Yang Xie

Authors
  1. Santiago Grau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Virginia Lozano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amparo Valladares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rafael Cavanillas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yang Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gonzalo Nocea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Santiago Grau.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grau, S., Lozano, V., Valladares, A. et al. Impact of a Dynamic Microbiological Environment on the Clinical Efficacy of Ertapenem and Piperacillin/Tazobactam in the Treatment of Complicated Community-Acquired Intra-Abdominal Infection in Spain: A Cost-Consequence Analysis. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 13, 369–379 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-015-0162-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-015-0162-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation