Carbapenem or new β-lactam-β-lactamase inhibitors? An Italian survey supported by SITA, SIMIT and SIAARTI to identify the factors affecting empiric antimicrobial therapy choice in real-life clinical practice

While a tailored antibiotic treatment plan is often straightforward, what we often observe in daily clinical practice is a highly variable approach when defining empirical therapy. Specifically, a debate exists on preference to spare the new β-lactams and β-lactamase inhibitors (BL-BLIs) or to apply a carbapenem-sparing strategy first. To investigate, we designed a web survey aimed at investigating the variables considered relevant to empirically choosing one antibiotic over the other. Submitted to Italian infectious diseases and intensive care physicians through the support of Società Italiana di Malattie Infettive e Tropicali (SIMIT), Società Italiana di Terapia Antinfettiva (SITA) and Società Italiana Anestesia, Analgesia, Rianimazione e Terapia Intensiva (SIAARTI). We found that demographic characteristics were irrelevant when deciding for empirical therapy. Clinical and anamnestic data were most meaningful. Significantly considered were underlying comorbidities and previous exposure to antimicrobial treatments. History of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant, carbapenem-resistant and/or metallo-β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales rectal colonisation and/or infection were considered the most relevant by most physicians. Unexpectedly, clinicians considered less the source of infection. These results prompt the need of straightforward methods to retrieve medical histories and the magnitude of rectal colonisation data, often not routinely obtained.