BACKGROUND: Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) offers an alternative to inpatient (hospital bed-based) treatment of infections that require intravenous administration of antimicrobials. This meta-analysis aimed to summarise the evidence available from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the efficacy and safety of OPAT compared to inpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy.
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Sciences databases for RCTs comparing outpatient versus inpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. We included studies without restrictions on language or publication year. Eligibility was reviewed independently by two assessors, and data extraction was cross validated. We evaluated bias risk via the Cochrane tool and determined the evidence certainty using GRADE. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model. The protocol of this review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023460389).
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs, involving 1,310 participants were included. We found no difference in mortality (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.54, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.23 to 1.26; P = 0.93), treatment failure (RR 1.0, CI 0.59 to 1.72; P = 0.99), adverse reaction related to antimicrobials (RR 0.89, CI 0.69 to 1.15; P = 0.38), and administration device (RR 0.58, CI 0.17 to 1.98; P = 0.87) between outpatient and inpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. The overall body of evidence had a low level of certainty.
CONCLUSIONS: Existing evidence suggests OPAT is a safe and effective alternative to inpatient treatment. Further RCTs are warranted for a thorough comparison of inpatient and outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy with a high level of certainty.

UNASSIGNED: The management of invasive infections related to substance use disorder (SUD) needing parenteral antimicrobial therapy is challenging and may have poor treatment outcomes including nonadherence and lack of completion of parenteral antimicrobial therapy.
UNASSIGNED: In this retrospective cohort of 201 patients with invasive infections related to SUD, we looked at frequency and determinants of unfavorable outcomes including nonadherence.
UNASSIGNED: Seventy-nine percent of patients with SUD-related infection completed parenteral antibiotic therapy in skilled nursing facilities. A total of 21.5% of patient episodes had documentation of nonadherence. Nonadherence was higher in patients with active injection drug use (IDU) (28.5% versus 15% in non IDU; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-5.5; P = .024), patients with active SUD in the prior year (24.5% vs 11%, P = .047), patients with use of more than 1 illicit substance (30.3% vs 17%, P = .031), as well as in people experiencing homelessness (32.8% vs 15.7% in stably housed, P = .005). In a multivariate model, nonadherence was significantly associated with IDU (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.03-5.5) and homelessness (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.01-4.8) Medication for opioid use disorder was prescribed at discharge in 68% of overall cohort and was not associated with improved outcomes for any of the above groups.
UNASSIGNED: Nonadherence to parenteral antimicrobial therapy is high in the most vulnerable patients with unstable high-risk SUD and adverse social determinants of health.

Periprosthetic infection remains the most common complication after implant-based breast reconstruction. Objectives of the study were to (1) describe our clinical approach and treatment protocol for managing patients with suspected periprosthetic infection, (2) identify the microorganisms causing periprosthetic infections at our institute, and (3) report on outcomes of implant salvage versus explantation.
A retrospective chart review of patients who were treated with parenteral antibiotics for periprosthetic infection was carried out. Patient characteristics, clinical and laboratory findings, outcomes, treatment modalities and complications were extracted from electronic medical records. Data were compared between patients whose implants were salvaged versus explanted.
Fifty-nine patients with 67 tissue expander (TE)/implants underwent parenteral antibiotic treatment for suspected infection. Thirty-three (49%) of the TE/implants were salvaged. Mean follow-up was 14.3 months. The most commonly cultured organisms were P. aeruginosa followed by S. epidermidis. All suspected infections were treated with broad spectrum parenteral antibiotics with MRSA coverage. The most common combination was daptomycin 6 mg/kg combined with Zosyn 4.5 g. Explantations were significantly more common in patients with history of chemotherapy (p = 0.03), hypertension (p = 0.04) and those who underwent therapeutic mastectomy (p = 0.04).
Risk factors for explantation due to postoperative periprosthetic infections following TE/implant-based breast reconstruction include chemotherapy, hypertension and therapeutic mastectomy. Prompt diagnosis and effective treatment of periprosthetic infection, particularly in these high-risk patients, are imperative to salvage the breast reconstruction. Gram-negative bacteria are increasingly found in breast implant infections and should be covered when employing empiric antibiotherapy.
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Treatment of community acquired skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) is a common indication for outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) in USA, UK and Australasia, however data from Asia are lacking. OPAT is well established within the Singapore healthcare since 2002, however, systematic use of OPAT for the treatment of SSTIs remains infrequent. In this report, we describe the treatment and outcome of patients with SSTIs referred directly from Emergency Department (ED) to OPAT for continuation of intravenous (IV) antibiotics in Singapore, thus avoiding potential hospital admission.
This is a single center university hospital retrospective study of patients with SSTIs presenting to ED who were assessed to require IV antibiotics and accepted to the OPAT clinic for continuation of IV treatment. Exclusion criteria were: haemodynamic instability, uncontrolled or serious underlying co-morbidities, necessity for inpatient surgical drainage, facial cellulitis and cephalosporin allergy. Patients returned daily to the hospital’s OPAT clinic for administration of IV antibiotics and review, then switched to oral antibiotics on improvement.
From 7 February 2012 to 31 July 2015, 120 patients with SSTIs were treated in OPAT. Median age was 56 years and 63% were male. Lower limbs were affected in 91%. Diabetes was present in 20%. Sixty-seven (56%) had been treated with oral antibiotics for a median duration of 3 days prior to OPAT treatment. Common symptoms were erythema (100%), swelling (96%), pain (88%) and fever (55%). Antibiotics administered were IV cefazolin with oral probenecid (71%) or IV ceftriaxone (29%) for median 3 days then oral cloxacillin (85%) for median 7 days. Clinical improvement occurred in 90%. Twelve patients (10%) were hospitalized for worsening cellulitis, with 4 patients requiring surgical drainage of abscess. Microbiological cultures from 2 patients with drained abscess grew methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and Klebsiella pneumoniae, both of which were susceptible to cefazolin and ceftriaxone. Hospital bed days saved was 318 days.
OPAT treatment of community acquired SSTIs in a selected patient population has good outcomes in Singapore. Treatment with IV cefazolin or IV ceftriaxone was successful in the majority with low hospital readmission rate.

Many healthcare services that were once only available in acute settings are now common in the community. Intravenous (IV) therapy is increasingly available as a community service. Given the option, most patients would choose to receive their treatment in a community setting, rather than in hospital. This article describes several outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy services, including their advantages and disadvantages. It explores the ways one community NHS trust has developed its community IV therapy service over the past ten years and examines issues pertinent to effective service delivery.