Debunking Myths in Infectious Diseases: An Evidence-Based Review for the Critical Care Practitioner

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Infectious diseases remain a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients, yet clinical practice is often influenced by persistent myths and outdated paradigms. This comprehensive review examines commonly held misconceptions in infectious disease management within the intensive care unit (ICU), providing evidence-based corrections supported by contemporary literature. We address myths spanning antibiotic therapy, diagnostic stewardship, infection prevention, and specific pathogen management. By challenging these deeply entrenched beliefs, we aim to optimize antimicrobial stewardship, improve patient outcomes, and reduce healthcare costs. This article provides critical care practitioners with practical pearls and evidence-based strategies to navigate the complex landscape of infectious diseases in the ICU.

Keywords: Critical care, infectious diseases, antimicrobial stewardship, myths, evidence-based medicine, ICU

Introduction

The management of infectious diseases in the intensive care unit represents one of the most challenging aspects of critical care medicine. Despite advances in diagnostic technology and therapeutic options, clinical decision-making is frequently influenced by tradition, anecdote, and persistent myths that lack robust scientific support. These misconceptions can lead to inappropriate antibiotic use, delayed appropriate therapy, increased healthcare costs, and worse patient outcomes.

The consequences of myth-perpetuation in infectious disease management are substantial. Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing contributes to antimicrobial resistance, which the World Health Organization has identified as one of the top ten global public health threats. In the ICU setting, where patients are most vulnerable and pathogens are most virulent, evidence-based practice is paramount.

This review systematically addresses prevalent myths in infectious disease management, providing contemporary evidence to guide optimal clinical practice. We have organized these myths into clinically relevant categories and provide actionable recommendations for the practicing intensivist.

Myth 1: "Fever Always Requires Blood Cultures and Antibiotics"

The Myth

A temperature elevation in the ICU automatically mandates obtaining blood cultures and initiating empiric antibiotics, regardless of clinical context.

The Reality

Fever in the ICU has numerous non-infectious etiologies, and reflexive antibiotic administration leads to unnecessary treatment, antimicrobial resistance, and increased costs. A systematic approach to fever evaluation is essential.

Evidence: Studies demonstrate that only 30-40% of ICU fever episodes are attributable to infection (1). Common non-infectious causes include:

Drug-induced fever (antibiotics, anticonvulsants, antiarrhythmics)
Thromboembolism
Transfusion reactions
Acalculous cholecystitis
Pancreatitis
Central fever following neurological injury
Adrenal insufficiency

Laupland et al. demonstrated that only 26.5% of fever episodes in medical-surgical ICU patients were associated with new infections (2). Furthermore, the THERMITE trial showed that aggressive fever management with antipyretics did not improve outcomes in critically ill patients (3).

Clinical Pearl

The "5 Ps" approach to ICU fever:

Pipes (intravascular catheters, endotracheal tubes, urinary catheters)
Pharma (medications)
Phleb (venous thromboembolism)
Pus (surgical sites, sinuses, intra-abdominal collections)
Parenchyma (lungs, urinary tract, CNS)

Practical Recommendations

Obtain focused history and examination before reflexive antibiotic initiation
Reserve blood cultures for patients with hemodynamic instability, immunosuppression, or high clinical suspicion for bacteremia
Consider a 2-4 hour observation period in stable patients with isolated fever
Review medication list for drug-induced fever
Assess for non-infectious inflammatory conditions

Hack: Use procalcitonin (PCT) to guide antibiotic decisions in undifferentiated fever. PCT <0.5 ng/mL has high negative predictive value for bacterial infection (4).

Myth 2: "Double Coverage for Pseudomonas is Always Necessary"

The Myth

Patients with suspected or confirmed Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections require two anti-pseudomonal agents to prevent resistance development and improve outcomes.

The Reality

Combination therapy for Pseudomonas has not demonstrated consistent mortality benefit in randomized trials, and monotherapy is appropriate in most clinical scenarios once susceptibility is known.

Evidence: Multiple meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate superiority of combination therapy over monotherapy for Pseudomonas infections:

A 2020 meta-analysis by Tamma et al. including 41 studies found no mortality benefit for combination therapy versus monotherapy for gram-negative bloodstream infections, including those caused by Pseudomonas (5).
The MERINO trial, while focusing on carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, demonstrated that monotherapy with meropenem (when susceptible) was non-inferior to combination therapy (6).
Kumar et al. showed that appropriate monotherapy given within 1 hour of shock recognition was more important than combination therapy for septic shock survival (7).

When Combination Therapy May Be Warranted

Empiric therapy in severely ill patients before susceptibilities are known
Neutropenic fever with hemodynamic instability
Confirmed carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas with limited options
Endocarditis or meningitis caused by Pseudomonas (specific indications)

Clinical Pearl

"Time to appropriate therapy" beats "number of antibiotics." A single appropriate antibiotic started early outperforms delayed combination therapy.

Practical Recommendations

Use empiric double coverage only in high-risk patients with prior resistant Pseudomonas or severe sepsis/septic shock
De-escalate to monotherapy once susceptibilities confirm activity
Optimize pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (extended infusion beta-lactams)
Target duration: 7-8 days for most infections, not the traditional 14-21 days

Oyster: Prolonged combination therapy increases risk of nephrotoxicity (aminoglycosides), C. difficile infection, and resistance without clear benefit.

Myth 3: "Antibiotics Should Be Continued Until Inflammatory Markers Normalize"

The Myth

Treatment duration should be guided by normalization of white blood cell count, C-reactive protein (CRP), or procalcitonin levels.

The Reality

Fixed, shorter durations based on source control and clinical stability are superior to biomarker-guided prolonged therapy for most infections.

Evidence: Multiple studies challenge the practice of treating until inflammatory markers normalize:

The STOP-IT trial demonstrated that 4 days of antibiotics for complicated intra-abdominal infections (with source control) was non-inferior to longer durations (8).
For hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia, 7-8 days of therapy is adequate for most patients regardless of biomarker levels (9).
The PRORATA trial showed procalcitonin-guided therapy could safely reduce antibiotic duration, but the benefit was shorter durations overall, not treating until normalization (10).

A key concept: inflammatory markers lag behind clinical improvement and pathogen eradication. CRP can remain elevated for weeks despite clinical cure.

Clinical Pearl

Clinical stability criteria (rather than laboratory normalization):

Hemodynamic stability without vasopressors for 24 hours
Improving oxygenation
Resolving fever (<38°C for 24-48 hours)
Normalizing mental status
Tolerating enteral nutrition
Source control achieved

Practical Recommendations

Use fixed, evidence-based durations for common ICU infections:
- Uncomplicated bloodstream infection: 7 days
- VAP/HAP: 7 days
- Intra-abdominal infection with source control: 4 days
- Urinary tract infection: 7 days
- Skin/soft tissue infection: 5-7 days after last debridement
Consider procalcitonin-guided therapy for undifferentiated sepsis to enable earlier discontinuation, not as a reason to continue longer
Re-evaluate patients at days 3-5 for potential early discontinuation if clinically improved

Hack: Create "antibiotic timeout" reminders at days 3, 5, and 7 to systematically reassess necessity.

Myth 4: "MRSA Nasal Swab Negativity Rules Out MRSA Pneumonia"

The Myth

A negative MRSA nasal PCR has sufficient negative predictive value to withhold anti-MRSA therapy in suspected pneumonia.

The Reality

While MRSA nasal colonization has high negative predictive value (NPV) for MRSA infection in many studies, important caveats exist that limit clinical applicability, particularly in high-risk populations.

Evidence: The performance of MRSA nasal screening varies by population and clinical context:

Studies in general ICU populations show NPV of 95-99% for MRSA pneumonia (11).
However, in patients with recent antibiotic exposure, prolonged hospitalization, or immunosuppression, NPV drops to 85-90% (12).
Sensitivity of nasal screening for detecting colonization is approximately 70-90%, meaning colonized patients may be missed (13).

Clinical Pearl

Risk stratify before relying on negative MRSA screen:

Low-risk (community-acquired pneumonia, no healthcare exposure, short ICU stay): Negative screen reliably excludes MRSA
High-risk (recent antibiotics, prolonged hospitalization, dialysis, known colonization history): Consider empiric anti-MRSA therapy despite negative screen

Practical Recommendations

Obtain MRSA nasal PCR on ICU admission for all patients
Use negative results to narrow empiric therapy in low-risk patients
Do NOT withhold anti-MRSA therapy in septic shock or severe CAP with high suspicion
De-escalate anti-MRSA therapy at 48-72 hours if cultures negative

Oyster: Don't confuse "high NPV" with "100% NPV." Clinical judgment supersedes screening results in critically ill patients.

Myth 5: "Antifungal Prophylaxis Should Be Routine in the ICU"

The Myth

All ICU patients, particularly those receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics or with central lines, should receive antifungal prophylaxis.

The Reality

Universal antifungal prophylaxis in general ICU populations is not supported by evidence and may lead to resistance and toxicity.

Evidence:

Prophylaxis has shown benefit only in highly selected populations: allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients, selected solid organ transplant recipients, and recurrent gastrointestinal perforation with candidiasis (14).
The majority of ICU patients do NOT benefit from routine prophylaxis.
A Cochrane review found insufficient evidence to support routine prophylaxis in non-neutropenic critically ill patients (15).

Appropriate Candida Prevention Strategies

Early central line removal when no longer essential
Antimicrobial stewardship to reduce broad-spectrum antibiotic pressure
Source control for intra-abdominal infections
Selective prophylaxis only in highest-risk patients (recurrent GI perforation, necrotizing pancreatitis with multiple risk factors)

Clinical Pearl

Use validated risk scores rather than empiricism:

Candida Score ≥3 or
Colonization Index >0.4 in post-surgical patients with persistent fever may warrant empiric antifungal therapy (not prophylaxis) (16)

Practical Recommendations

Avoid routine prophylaxis in general ICU populations
Focus on risk factor reduction (remove unnecessary lines, antimicrobial stewardship)
Consider targeted prophylaxis only in post-surgical patients with ≥2 perforations and candida colonization
Use echinocandins (not fluconazole) for high-risk prophylaxis due to resistance concerns

Hack: "Treat colonization" myths are equally problematic—candida colonization without infection does NOT require treatment.

Myth 6: "Anaerobic Coverage is Needed for All Aspiration Pneumonia"

The Myth

Witnessed aspiration events require anaerobic antibiotic coverage with metronidazole or beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors.

The Reality

Most aspiration-associated pneumonias are caused by aerobic bacteria, and routine anaerobic coverage is unnecessary and potentially harmful.

Evidence:

Multiple studies using modern microbiologic techniques (including anaerobic cultures) demonstrate that anaerobes are isolated in <10% of aspiration pneumonia cases (17).
The IDSA/ATS guidelines do NOT recommend routine anaerobic coverage for aspiration pneumonia (18).
Metronidazole monotherapy is associated with treatment failure in aspiration pneumonia.
Community-acquired aspiration pneumonia has similar microbiology to non-aspiration CAP: S. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, S. aureus, and gram-negative rods.

When to Consider Anaerobic Coverage

Lung abscess or necrotizing pneumonia
Empyema with putrid discharge
Aspiration from obstructed bowel (small bowel obstruction aspiration)
Periodontal disease with putrid sputum

Clinical Pearl

The term "aspiration pneumonitis" (chemical injury from gastric contents) vs. "aspiration pneumonia" (bacterial infection) is crucial. Pneumonitis does not require antibiotics at all.

Practical Recommendations

Use standard CAP or HAP regimens for aspiration-associated pneumonia
Reserve anaerobic coverage for lung abscess/necrotizing pneumonia
Stop metronidazole if added empirically once cultures return without anaerobes
Appropriate regimens:
- Community aspiration: Ceftriaxone + azithromycin OR fluoroquinolone
- Hospital aspiration: Pip-tazo OR cefepime + vancomycin
- Lung abscess: Add metronidazole or use carbapenem

Oyster: Metronidazole has poor lung penetration; use beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors or carbapenems if anaerobic coverage truly needed.

Myth 7: "Positive Urine Culture Equals UTI"

The Myth

Any positive urine culture in an ICU patient with fever requires treatment.

The Reality

Asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is extremely common in catheterized patients and does not warrant treatment except in specific circumstances.

Evidence:

Up to 100% of patients with indwelling catheters develop bacteriuria by 30 days (19).
Treating ASB does not improve outcomes and increases antibiotic resistance and C. difficile risk (20).
The IDSA guidelines explicitly recommend AGAINST treating ASB except in pregnancy or before urologic procedures (21).

Distinguishing UTI from ASB in ICU Patients

True catheter-associated UTI (CAUTI) requires:

Indwelling catheter OR catheter removed within 48 hours
Fever (>38°C) OR leukocytosis OR altered mental status with no other source
Positive urine culture (>10^5 CFU/mL)

ASB: Positive culture without systemic signs attributable to urinary source

Clinical Pearl

CAUTI red flags that suggest true infection:

Suprapubic tenderness
Costovertebral angle tenderness
Pyuria + bacteremia with same organism
Septic shock without alternative source

Practical Recommendations

Do NOT send urine cultures in catheterized patients unless clinically indicated
Do NOT treat positive cultures in asymptomatic patients
Remove catheters promptly when no longer needed
If CAUTI diagnosed, treat for 7 days (not 10-14 days) (22)
Remove or exchange catheter during treatment

Hack: Implement "catheter removal order" protocols where indication is reassessed daily.

Myth 8: "Gram-Positive Cocci in Clusters in Blood Cultures = Start Vancomycin Immediately"

The Myth

Any gram-positive cocci in clusters (GPC-C) from blood cultures mandate immediate vancomycin while awaiting speciation.

The Reality

Most GPC-C are coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), which are usually contaminants. Risk stratification based on clinical context is essential to avoid unnecessary vancomycin.

Evidence:

CoNS represent 70-80% of GPC-C blood culture isolates (23).
Of CoNS isolates, 80-90% are contaminants rather than true bacteremia (24).
Criteria for true CoNS bacteremia: positive cultures from multiple sites, prosthetic material, or cardiovascular implantable devices (25).

Risk Stratification for GPC-C

High probability of S. aureus (treat immediately):

Septic shock
Clinical focus (endocarditis, osteomyelitis, abscess)
Healthcare exposure within 90 days
Hemodialysis
IV drug use
Prosthetic valves/devices

High probability of CoNS contaminant (consider observation):

Single positive culture
No prosthetic material
No hemodynamic instability
Drawn from peripheral line only

Clinical Pearl

Differential time to positivity (DTP): If central line culture turns positive >2 hours before peripheral culture, suspect catheter-related bloodstream infection.

Practical Recommendations

Assess probability of true S. aureus vs. CoNS contaminant
In low-risk patients with single GPC-C culture, consider awaiting speciation before starting vancomycin
Always start vancomycin for GPC-C in septic shock or with clinical focus
If CoNS confirmed, determine true bacteremia vs. contaminant before continuing antibiotics
Remove central lines if CoNS suspected as source

Oyster: Unnecessary vancomycin from "vanc-first-ask-questions-later" approach contributes to resistance and nephrotoxicity.

Myth 9: "C. difficile Infection Requires Contact Isolation Until Toxin-Negative"

The Myth

Patients with CDI must remain in contact isolation until repeat toxin testing is negative.

The Reality

Contact isolation can be discontinued after diarrhea resolution; repeat testing is NOT recommended and leads to prolonged unnecessary isolation.

Evidence:

IDSA/SHEA guidelines explicitly recommend AGAINST repeat testing following treatment as "test of cure" (26).
Up to 50% of successfully treated patients remain toxin-positive for weeks despite clinical resolution (27).
Isolation can be discontinued 48 hours after last diarrheal stool.
Prolonged isolation increases risk of adverse events (falls, delirium, depression).

Clinical Pearl

CDI resolution criteria:

≤3 unformed stools per 24 hours for 48 hours OR
Return to normal bowel pattern for that patient

No laboratory testing required.

Practical Recommendations

Treat for 10 days (fidaxomicin) or 10-14 days (vancomycin)
Discontinue contact precautions 48 hours after symptom resolution
Do NOT obtain repeat stool testing
For recurrent CDI, consider bezlotoxumab or fecal microbiota transplant after 2nd recurrence
Continue probiotics for 8 weeks after treatment to reduce recurrence risk

Hack: "Clinical cure, not laboratory cure" should guide isolation decisions.

Myth 10: "Gram-Negative Rods in Respiratory Cultures Always Require Treatment"

The Myth

Any gram-negative bacteria isolated from respiratory cultures (sputum, endotracheal aspirates) in mechanically ventilated patients represent pneumonia and require treatment.

The Reality

Colonization of the respiratory tract is ubiquitous in intubated patients, and clinical correlation is essential to distinguish infection from colonization.

Evidence:

Virtually all intubated patients become colonized with gram-negative bacteria within 48-96 hours (28).
The Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS) was developed to improve diagnostic accuracy (29).
Studies show that treating all positive respiratory cultures (vs. treating only clinically diagnosed pneumonia) does not improve outcomes and increases antibiotic use (30).

CPIS Components (Modified)

Temperature: >38.5°C or <36°C (1 point)
Leukocytes: >11,000 or <4,000 (1 point) OR ≥50% bands (add 1 point)
Pulmonary secretions: moderate/large (1 point) OR purulent (add 1 point)
Oxygenation: PaO2/FiO2 ≤240 and no ARDS (2 points)
Chest X-ray: new/progressive infiltrate (2 points)
Microbiology: positive culture (1 point) OR pathogenic bacteria (add 1 point)

Score >6: Treat as pneumonia Score ≤6: Consider observation, repeat assessment

Clinical Pearl

The "antibiotic-associated tracheobronchitis" (ABT) diagnosis is controversial. Most "tracheobronchitis" is colonization, not infection, and antibiotics are generally not warranted.

Practical Recommendations

Use clinical criteria (CPIS, infiltrate + fever + leukocytosis + purulent secretions) rather than cultures alone
Send respiratory cultures BEFORE starting antibiotics when feasible
Use quantitative cultures when available:
- BAL: ≥10^4 CFU/mL
- Protected brush: ≥10^3 CFU/mL
- Endotracheal aspirate: ≥10^5-10^6 CFU/mL
Reassess at 48-72 hours and de-escalate based on culture results and clinical response

Oyster: Treating colonization creates resistance without benefiting the patient.

Myth 11: "Nephrotoxicity Risk Precludes Aminoglycoside Use"

The Myth

Aminoglycosides should be avoided in critically ill patients due to unacceptable nephrotoxicity risk.

The Reality

When used appropriately (once-daily dosing, limited duration, specific indications), aminoglycosides are safe and often essential components of therapy for serious gram-negative infections.

Evidence:

Once-daily aminoglycoside dosing significantly reduces nephrotoxicity compared to multiple daily dosing (31).
Short-course aminoglycosides (3-5 days) as part of combination therapy have acceptable safety profiles (32).
For certain infections (endocarditis, CNS infections, carbapenem-resistant gram-negatives), aminoglycosides may be necessary.

Appropriate Aminoglycoside Use

Indications:

Gram-negative endocarditis (combination therapy)
CNS infections with susceptible gram-negative organisms
Empiric combination therapy for neutropenic fever
Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (with other active agents)
Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas (limited alternatives)

Contraindications/Strong cautions:

Baseline CrCl <30 mL/min
Concurrent nephrotoxins (contrast, vancomycin, NSAIDs)
Myasthenia gravis
Need for prolonged therapy (>7 days)

Clinical Pearl

Extended-interval dosing (once daily):

Gentamicin/tobramycin: 5-7 mg/kg once daily
Amikacin: 15-20 mg/kg once daily
Monitor trough <1 mcg/mL (gentamicin/tobramycin)

Practical Recommendations

Use once-daily dosing exclusively
Limit duration to 3-7 days when possible
Adjust dose based on pharmacokinetic monitoring
Stop immediately if creatinine increases by ≥0.5 mg/dL
Avoid concurrent nephrotoxins when feasible
Adequate hydration is protective

Hack: Hartford nomogram for simplified extended-interval dosing and monitoring.

Myth 12: "Antibiotic Allergy Labels Should Be Taken at Face Value"

The Myth

Documented antibiotic allergies are accurate and should guide prescribing without further investigation.

The Reality

Over 90% of reported penicillin allergies are not true IgE-mediated hypersensitivity, and allergy labels significantly limit therapeutic options and worsen outcomes.

Evidence:

Only 10% of patients labeled "penicillin-allergic" have true IgE-mediated allergy on testing (33).
Patients labeled penicillin-allergic have:
- Higher treatment failure rates (34)
- Longer hospital stays
- Increased MRSA and VRE infections (35)
- Higher costs
- More C. difficile infections

Allergy Delabeling

Low-risk patients (can receive beta-lactams):

Remote, vague childhood history
Family history only
Non-severe symptoms: rash without features below
Tolerance of other beta-lactams since reaction

High-risk patients (avoid beta-lactams or require testing):

Anaphylaxis (angioedema, hypotension, bronchospasm)
Stevens-Johnson syndrome/TEN
DRESS syndrome
Serum sickness
Hemolytic anemia
Recent reaction (<5 years)

Clinical Pearl

Direct oral challenge is safe in low-risk patients with remote, vague penicillin allergy history. In ICU, consider test dose: Give 10% of full dose; if tolerated after 30 minutes, give full dose.

Practical Recommendations

Obtain detailed allergy history on admission:
- What medication?
- What reaction?
- When did it occur?
- How was it treated?
- Has patient tolerated similar antibiotics since?
For low-risk histories, consider delabeling with graded challenge
Cross-reactivity:
- Penicillin to cephalosporin: <2% (safe in most)
- Penicillin to carbapenem: <1% (safe in most)
- Cephalosporin to carbapenem: <2-3%
For severe beta-lactam allergy with indication for beta-lactam, consider desensitization (consult allergy)

Oyster: "Penicillin allergy" labels are barriers to optimal therapy; aggressive delabeling improves outcomes.

Myth 13: "Daptomycin is Appropriate for Pneumonia"

The Myth

Daptomycin can be used as an alternative to vancomycin for MRSA pneumonia or other lung infections.

The Reality

Daptomycin is inactivated by pulmonary surfactant and is CONTRAINDICATED for pneumonia.

Evidence:

In vitro and animal studies demonstrate complete inactivation of daptomycin by pulmonary surfactant (36).
Clinical trials showed inferior outcomes with daptomycin vs. comparators for pneumonia (37).
FDA has a black box warning against using daptomycin for pneumonia.
No amount of dose escalation overcomes surfactant inactivation.

Appropriate Daptomycin Use

Indications:

MRSA bacteremia
Right-sided endocarditis (S. aureus)
Complicated skin/soft tissue infections
Osteomyelitis
Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infections

NOT for:

Pneumonia (any type)
Left-sided endocarditis (needs combination with beta-lactam)

Clinical Pearl

For MRSA pneumonia alternatives to vancomycin:

Linezolid 600 mg IV/PO q12h (excellent lung penetration)
Ceftaroline 600 mg IV q8h
Tedizolid 200 mg IV/PO daily

Practical Recommendations

Never use daptomycin for pulmonary infections
If patient started on daptomycin has new lung process, switch agents
For MRSA bacteremia WITH pneumonia, use linezolid or ceftaroline instead
For VRE bacteremia WITH pneumonia, consider linezolid

Hack: "Daptomycin doesn't breathe"—simple mnemonic to remember contraindication.

Myth 14: "Procalcitonin Can Reliably Distinguish Bacterial from Viral Infections"

The Myth

Procalcitonin levels definitively differentiate bacterial from viral infections, with low levels ruling out bacterial infection.

The Reality

While procalcitonin is useful as a part of clinical decision-making, significant overlap exists between bacterial and viral infections, and multiple conditions affect levels independent of infection type.

Evidence:

Meta-analyses show procalcitonin has moderate sensitivity (71-77%) and specificity (69-78%) for bacterial infection (38).
Significant overlap exists: bacterial infections can have low PCT, and viral infections can have elevated PCT.
PCT is most useful for RULING OUT bacterial infection (high NPV) rather than ruling in (39).

Conditions Affecting Procalcitonin Independent of Infection

Elevated PCT without bacterial infection:

Severe trauma/burns
Major surgery
Severe pancreatitis
Cardiogenic shock
Heat stroke
Small cell lung cancer
Medullary thyroid cancer

Suppressed PCT despite bacterial infection:

Early infection (<6 hours)
Localized infection without systemic response
Immunosuppression
Corticosteroid therapy

Clinical Pearl

Procalcitonin interpretation by level:

<0.5 ng/mL: Low probability of bacterial infection
0.5-2.0 ng/mL: Moderate probability, clinical correlation essential
2.0-10 ng/mL: High probability of bacterial sepsis
10 ng/mL: Very high probability of severe bacterial sepsis

Practical Recommendations

Use PCT as an adjunct, not sole determinant, of antibiotic decisions
Serial measurements (every 2-3 days) are more valuable than single values
80% decrease from peak suggests adequate treatment
Do NOT delay antibiotics in septic shock awaiting PCT results
Best use: safely discontinuing antibiotics when PCT falls and clinical improvement occurs

Oyster: PCT is a tool to help STOP antibiotics, not primarily to START them.

Myth 15: "Fungal Prophylaxis with Fluconazole Prevents Candida Infections in ICU"

The Myth

Universal or broad fluconazole prophylaxis in ICU patients prevents invasive candidiasis.

The Reality

Fluconazole prophylaxis reduces candida infections but selects for resistant species (C. glabrata, C. krusei) and is not recommended for general ICU populations.

Evidence:

Studies show fluconazole prophylaxis reduces candida infections but increases azole-resistant species (40).
No mortality benefit demonstrated in general ICU populations (41).
Increased healthcare costs without clear benefit.
Rising prevalence of C. auris, which is often fluconazole-resistant.

Appropriate Antifungal Stewardship

Reserved prophylaxis for:

Recurrent GI perforation with previous candidiasis
Selected post-transplant patients (institutional protocols)
Neutropenic patients (hematology protocols)

Empiric treatment (not prophylaxis) when:

Candida Score ≥3
Persistent fever despite antibiotics + multiple risk factors
Critically ill patient with candida colonization at multiple sites

Clinical Pearl

Echinocandins > Fluconazole for:

Empiric therapy in ICU
Patients with recent azole exposure
Hemodynamically unstable patients
Known/suspected azole-resistant species

Practical Recommendations

Avoid routine prophylaxis; focus on risk factor modification
For empiric therapy, use echinocandins (micafungin, anidulafungin, caspofungin)
De-escalate to fluconazole only if:
- Species susceptible
- Hemodynamically stable
- Source control achieved
Duration: 14 days after first negative blood culture and symptom resolution
Ophthalmology examination for all candidemia

Hack: "No gut, no fluconazole"—echinocandins don't require GI absorption, making them superior in critically ill patients with ileus or malabsorption.

Emerging Concepts and Future Directions

Rapid Diagnostic Tests

The integration of rapid diagnostics (multiplex PCR panels, MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry, rapid susceptibility testing) is revolutionizing infectious disease management in the ICU. These technologies enable:

Species identification within hours rather than days
Earlier targeted therapy
Reduced unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotics
Improved antimicrobial stewardship

Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Optimization

Critically ill patients have altered drug pharmacokinetics due to:

Increased volume of distribution (fluid resuscitation)
Augmented renal clearance
Hypoalb

uminemia

Extracorporeal support (CRRT, ECMO)

Emerging strategies:

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for beta-lactams, not just vancomycin
Extended or continuous infusion beta-lactams to maximize time above MIC
Higher aminoglycoside doses in augmented renal clearance
Loading doses for all time-dependent antibiotics in septic shock

Bacteriophage Therapy

Compassionate use of bacteriophage therapy for multidrug-resistant organisms shows promise, particularly for:

Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae
Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas
Difficult-to-treat device-related infections

While still investigational, several centers now offer phage therapy protocols for desperate situations (42).

Microbiome Considerations

Recognition of the importance of microbiome preservation is changing antibiotic practices:

Narrower spectrum when possible
Shorter durations
Avoidance of unnecessary antibiotics
Probiotic and prebiotic strategies
Fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent C. difficile

Practical Implementation: The Antibiotic Stewardship Checklist

To combat these myths in daily practice, implement a systematic approach:

Daily ICU Antibiotic Review Checklist

Day 0-1 (Initiation):

[ ] Is there documented infection or high suspicion?
[ ] Are blood cultures obtained BEFORE antibiotics?
[ ] Is empiric regimen appropriate for suspected source?
[ ] Are dosages optimized for critically ill physiology?
[ ] Is MRSA nasal screen obtained?
[ ] Is duration "stop date" documented?

Day 2-3 (Early Reassessment):

[ ] Are culture results available?
[ ] Can regimen be narrowed based on cultures?
[ ] Is patient clinically improving?
[ ] Can MRSA coverage be stopped if screen negative?
[ ] Is source control adequate?
[ ] Are redundant antibiotics present?

Day 5-7 (Duration Assessment):

[ ] Has clinical stability been achieved?
[ ] Is continued therapy justified?
[ ] Has stop date been reached?
[ ] Can IV be switched to PO?
[ ] Is step-down from ICU possible?

Weekly (Prolonged Therapy):

[ ] Why is therapy still ongoing?
[ ] Is this treating infection or colonization?
[ ] What are we waiting for to stop?
[ ] Has TDM been performed if indicated?
[ ] Has antimicrobial resistance emerged?

Case-Based Applications

Case 1: Debunking the Fever Reflex

Presentation: 58-year-old man, post-operative day 3 after open AAA repair. Temperature 38.6°C. Blood pressure 128/72, heart rate 98, no respiratory distress. Physical exam unremarkable. WBC 11,500.

Myth-driven approach:

Order blood cultures, urine culture, chest X-ray
Start vancomycin + piperacillin-tazobactam empirically
Continue until cultures negative and fever resolves

Evidence-based approach:

Assess clinical context: Post-operative day 3, hemodynamically stable, no localizing signs
Review medications: Started cefazolin for surgical prophylaxis (now stopped), started famotidine
Consider non-infectious causes: Drug fever (cefazolin), atelectasis, DVT
Observe 4 hours: Fever resolved spontaneously without intervention
No cultures, no antibiotics: Avoided unnecessary treatment

Outcome: Patient remained afebrile; inflammatory markers trended down. Discharged POD 6 without antibiotics.

Pearl: Post-operative fever in first 5 days is rarely infectious. The "4 W's" (Wind, Water, Walking, Wound, Wonder drugs) help guide appropriate evaluation.

Case 2: Pseudomonas Monotherapy Success

Presentation: 72-year-old woman with hospital-acquired pneumonia. Sputum culture: P. aeruginosa resistant to fluoroquinolones, susceptible to cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem. Currently on cefepime + tobramycin (double coverage).

Myth-driven approach:

Continue both agents for 14 days
"Never give Pseudomonas a chance to develop resistance"

Evidence-based approach:

Reassess clinical status: Fever resolved, WBC normalizing, oxygen requirement improving
Review susceptibilities: Excellent activity of cefepime (MIC ≤2)
Pharmacokinetic optimization: Switch cefepime to extended infusion (2g IV over 3 hours q8h)
De-escalate: Stop tobramycin on day 3
Shorten duration: Plan 7-day total course

Outcome: Clinical cure with 7 days cefepime monotherapy. No nephrotoxicity. Repeat cultures negative.

Pearl: Pharmacokinetic optimization of a single, highly active agent beats combination therapy for most Pseudomonas infections.

Case 3: Resisting the Biomarker Temptation

Presentation: 65-year-old man treated for E. coli bacteremia from biliary source, post-ERCP with stent placement. Day 7 of therapy, afebrile for 4 days, hemodynamically stable, tolerating diet. WBC 9,800 but CRP still 8.5 mg/dL (down from 25).

Myth-driven approach:

Continue antibiotics until CRP normalizes
"Inflammation must be gone before stopping"
Potentially 14-21 days of therapy

Evidence-based approach:

Apply clinical stability criteria:
- ✓ Afebrile >48 hours
- ✓ Hemodynamically stable off pressors >24 hours
- ✓ Source control achieved (stent placed)
- ✓ Tolerating enteral nutrition
- ✓ Blood cultures negative
Check duration: 7 days for uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia with source control
Ignore persistently elevated CRP: Known to lag clinical improvement
Stop antibiotics: Day 7 as planned

Outcome: Remained clinically well. CRP normalized over subsequent 2 weeks without antibiotics. No relapse.

Pearl: Clinical stability trumps laboratory markers. Prolonging antibiotics waiting for marker normalization only increases resistance and toxicity risk.

Case 4: The MRSA Screen Saves Vancomycin

Presentation: 55-year-old woman with community-acquired pneumonia, admitted to ICU with respiratory failure. Empirically started on ceftriaxone + azithromycin + vancomycin due to severe presentation. MRSA nasal PCR obtained on admission returns negative at 24 hours.

Myth-driven approach:

Continue vancomycin for 48-72 hours until respiratory cultures negative
"Negative screen doesn't rule out MRSA pneumonia completely"

Evidence-based approach:

Risk stratify: Community-acquired pneumonia, no healthcare exposures, no recent antibiotics, no dialysis → LOW RISK
Apply high NPV: In low-risk patient, negative MRSA screen has 98-99% NPV
Review clinical course: Improving on ceftriaxone + azithromycin alone
Stop vancomycin: At 24 hours when screen returns negative

Outcome: Continued improvement on CAP regimen alone. Sputum culture grew S. pneumoniae. No adverse events. Avoided 4-5 days of unnecessary vancomycin.

Pearl: Negative MRSA screen in low-risk patients enables early vancomycin discontinuation, reducing nephrotoxicity, C. difficile risk, and resistance.

Case 5: Penicillin Allergy Delabeling

Presentation: 68-year-old man with E. coli prosthetic joint infection. Labeled penicillin allergy: "rash as a child." Currently on fluoroquinolone, but orthopedics recommends beta-lactam for optimal outcome.

Myth-driven approach:

Accept allergy label at face value
Use suboptimal fluoroquinolone-based regimen
Higher risk of treatment failure

Evidence-based approach:

Detailed allergy history:
- Reaction: unclear rash, age 5 (now 68)
- Treatment: none documented
- Subsequent exposures: none, avoided due to "allergy"
- No other drug allergies
Risk stratify: Remote, vague, non-severe history = LOW RISK
Graded challenge:
- Test dose: Ampicillin 50 mg IV, observe 30 minutes → No reaction
- Full dose: Ampicillin-sulbactam 3g IV → No reaction
Update allergy record: Remove penicillin allergy label
Optimal therapy: Transition to ampicillin-sulbactam for prosthetic joint infection

Outcome: Completed 6-week course without complications. Successful treatment. Allergy label permanently removed.

Pearl: Aggressive allergy delabeling enables optimal therapy. Low-risk histories warrant direct challenge without formal testing.

Special Populations: Additional Considerations

Immunocompromised Patients

While this review focuses on general ICU populations, immunocompromised patients warrant special mention:

Different rules apply:

Broader empiric coverage often appropriate
Opportunistic pathogens must be considered (PJP, invasive fungal, viral)
Negative MRSA screens less reliable
Procalcitonin less useful (may be suppressed)
Combination therapy may be warranted even after susceptibilities known
Longer treatment durations typically needed

Key principle: These are the exceptions that prove the rules. Standard stewardship principles apply but require modification.

Extracorporeal Support (CRRT, ECMO)

Antibiotic dosing in patients on CRRT or ECMO is complex:

CRRT considerations:

Augmented clearance of hydrophilic antibiotics (beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, vancomycin)
Higher doses often required
Continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) clears more than hemodialysis
Therapeutic drug monitoring essential

ECMO considerations:

Increased volume of distribution
Drug sequestration in circuit
Altered protein binding
Loading doses critical
TDM strongly recommended

Hack: Consult pharmacokinetics specialist early for patients on extracorporeal support.

Building an Institutional Culture of Stewardship

Debunking myths requires more than individual knowledge—it requires cultural change.

Elements of Successful Stewardship Programs

Multidisciplinary teams:
- Infectious disease physicians
- Clinical pharmacists
- ICU physicians/nurses
- Microbiology laboratory
- Infection prevention
Prospective audit and feedback:
- Daily review of broad-spectrum antibiotics
- Real-time recommendations
- Educational feedback loops
Electronic order sets:
- Built-in stop dates
- Indication documentation required
- Dose optimization tools
- Automatic alerts for prolonged therapy
Education:
- Regular case conferences
- M&M discussions including stewardship
- Pocket cards and quick references
- This type of myth-debunking education
Metrics and feedback:
- Days of therapy per 1000 patient-days
- Antibiotic costs
- C. difficile rates
- Resistance patterns

Success story: Institutions implementing comprehensive stewardship reduce antibiotic use by 20-30%, decrease C. difficile infections by 30-50%, and improve patient outcomes—all while reducing costs (43).

Key Antimicrobial Stewardship Pearls

The Ten Commandments of ICU Antimicrobial Stewardship

Cultures before antibiotics (except in septic shock—give antibiotics within 1 hour)
De-escalate, don't escalate—start broad, narrow quickly
Treat infection, not colonization—clinical diagnosis matters
Shorter is usually better—7 days for most ICU infections
One drug is often enough—combination therapy is the exception
PK/PD optimization beats additional drugs—extended infusions, loading doses
Stop antibiotics on schedule—don't wait for markers to normalize
Challenge allergy labels—enable optimal therapy
Remove hardware—source control is paramount
**Document "day 1" and "stop date"—accountability and transparency

Common Stewardship Errors to Avoid

The "Seven Deadly Sins" of ICU Antibiotic Use

Sloth: Continuing antibiotics because it's easier than stopping
Gluttony: Using broad-spectrum agents when narrow-spectrum would suffice
Greed: Combination therapy without clear indication
Pride: Refusing to de-escalate because "the patient is improving on current regimen"
Wrath: Treating every fever spike with escalation
Envy: Copying other services' regimens without independent assessment
Lust: Chasing every positive culture regardless of clinical significance

Future Challenges: Antimicrobial Resistance

The persistent myths addressed in this review directly contribute to the growing crisis of antimicrobial resistance. Current concerning trends include:

Carbapenem-Resistant Organisms

CRE (carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae): increasing globally
Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas: up to 20-30% resistance in some ICUs
Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter: endemic in many regions

Newer agents:

Ceftazidime-avibactam
Meropenem-vaborbactam
Imipenem-cilastatin-relebactam
Cefiderocol

Extensively Drug-Resistant Organisms

Pandrug-resistant gram-negatives emerging
Colistin resistance increasing
Limited pipeline for new antibiotics

Candida auris

Multi-drug resistant yeast
Difficult to identify
Causes outbreaks in ICUs
Requires enhanced infection control

The stakes: Without stewardship, we risk returning to a pre-antibiotic era where common infections become untreatable.

Conclusion

The myths addressed in this review represent deeply ingrained practices that persist despite contradictory evidence. Challenging these beliefs is essential for:

Optimizing patient outcomes
Reducing antimicrobial resistance
Minimizing toxicity and adverse events
Decreasing healthcare costs
Preserving antibiotic effectiveness for future generations

The modern intensivist must be an antimicrobial steward, armed with current evidence and willing to question tradition. Each decision to start, continue, or stop antibiotics carries consequences beyond the individual patient.

Final Pearls for Practice

Question everything: Just because "we've always done it this way" doesn't make it right
Embrace uncertainty: It's acceptable to say "I don't know if antibiotics are needed—let's observe"
Prioritize culture: Both microbiology cultures AND a culture of stewardship
Communicate clearly: Document indication, stop date, and rationale
Learn continuously: Guidelines evolve; stay current
Teach relentlessly: Pass evidence-based practices to the next generation
Measure outcomes: Track stewardship metrics and continuously improve

The battle against infectious diseases in the ICU is fought not just with antibiotics, but with wisdom, restraint, and evidence-based practice. By systematically debunking myths and embracing stewardship principles, we can improve outcomes today while preserving therapeutic options for tomorrow.

References

Circiumaru B, Baldock G, Cohen J. A prospective study of fever in the intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med. 1999;25(7):668-673.
Laupland KB, Shahpori R, Kirkpatrick AW, et al. Occurrence and outcome of fever in critically ill adults. Crit Care Med. 2008;36(5):1531-1535.
Young P, Saxena M, Bellomo R, et al. Acetaminophen for fever in critically ill patients with suspected infection. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(23):2215-2224.
Schuetz P, Wirz Y, Sager R, et al. Procalcitonin to initiate or discontinue antibiotics in acute respiratory tract infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;10(10):CD007498.
Tamma PD, Cosgrove SE, Maragakis LL. Combination therapy for treatment of infections with gram-negative bacteria. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2012;25(3):450-470.
Paul M, Daikos GL, Durante-Mangoni E, et al. Colistin alone versus colistin plus meropenem for treatment of severe infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria: an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(4):391-400.
Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(6):1589-1596.
Sawyer RG, Claridge JA, Nathens AB, et al. Trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intraabdominal infection. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(21):1996-2005.
Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY, et al. Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2003;290(19):2588-2598.
Bouadma L, Luyt CE, Tubach F, et al. Use of procalcitonin to reduce patients' exposure to antibiotics in intensive care units (PRORATA trial): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375(9713):463-474.
Parente DM, Cunha CB, Mylonakis E, Timbrook TT. The clinical utility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening to rule out MRSA pneumonia: a diagnostic meta-analysis with antimicrobial stewardship implications. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67(1):1-7.
Dangerfield B, Chung A, Webb B, Seville MT. Predictive value of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal swab PCR assay for MRSA pneumonia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(2):859-864.
Robicsek A, Suseno M, Beaumont JL, Thomson RB Jr, Peterson LR. Prediction of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus involvement in disease sites by concomitant nasal sampling. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46(2):588-592.
Playford EG, Webster AC, Sorrell TC, Craig JC. Antifungal agents for preventing fungal infections in non-neutropenic critically ill and surgical patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(1):CD004920.
Cruciani M, de Lalla F, Mengoli C. Prophylaxis of Candida infections in adult trauma and surgical intensive care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(11):1479-1487.
Leon C, Ruiz-Santana S, Saavedra P, et al. A bedside scoring system ("Candida score") for early antifungal treatment in nonneutropenic critically ill patients with Candida colonization. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(3):730-737.
Marik PE. Aspiration pneumonitis and aspiration pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(9):665-671.
Metlay JP, Waterer GW, Long AC, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia. An official clinical practice guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;200(7):e45-e67.
Saint S, Chenoweth CE. Biofilms and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2003;17(2):411-432.
Nicolle LE, Gupta K, Bradley SF, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the management of asymptomatic bacteriuria: 2019 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68(10):e83-e110.
Hooton TM, Bradley SF, Cardenas DD, et al. Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of catheter-associated urinary tract infection in adults: 2009 International Clinical Practice Guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(5):625-663.
Gupta K, Hooton TM, Naber KG, et al. International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of acute uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis in women: A 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the European Society for Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(5):e103-e120.
Weinstein MP, Towns ML, Quartey SM, et al. The clinical significance of positive blood cultures in the 1990s: a prospective comprehensive evaluation of the microbiology, epidemiology, and outcome of bacteremia and fungemia in adults. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(4):584-602.
Beekmann SE, Diekema DJ, Doern GV. Determining the clinical significance of coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated from blood cultures. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2005;26(6):559-566.
Baddour LM, Wilson WR, Bayer AS, et al. Infective endocarditis in adults: diagnosis, antimicrobial therapy, and management of complications: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2015;132(15):1435-1486.
McDonald LC, Gerding DN, Johnson S, et al. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile Infection in Adults and Children: 2017 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA). Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(7):e1-e48.
Longtin Y, Trottier S, Brochu G, et al. Impact of the type of diagnostic assay on Clostridium difficile infection and complication rates in a mandatory reporting program. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56(1):67-73.
Craven DE, Gerre LT, Fagon JY, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia: guidelines revisited. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010;16(3):173-179.
Singh N, Rogers P, Atwood CW, Wagener MM, Yu VL. Short-course empiric antibiotic therapy for patients with pulmonary infiltrates in the intensive care unit. A proposed solution for indiscriminate antibiotic prescription. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;162(2 Pt 1):505-511.
Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. A randomized trial of diagnostic techniques for ventilator-associated pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(25):2619-2630.
Hatala R, Dinh T, Cook DJ. Once-daily aminoglycoside dosing in immunocompetent adults: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124(8):717-725.
Barza M, Ioannidis JP, Cappelleri JC, Lau J. Single or multiple daily doses of aminoglycosides: a meta-analysis. BMJ. 1996;312(7027):338-345.
Macy E, Contreras R. Health care use and serious infection prevalence associated with penicillin "allergy" in hospitalized patients: A cohort study. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014;133(3):790-796.
Blumenthal KG, Lu N, Zhang Y, Li Y, Walensky RP, Choi HK. Risk of meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridium difficile in patients with a documented penicillin allergy: population based matched cohort study. BMJ. 2018;361:k2400.
MacFadden DR, LaDelfa A, Leen J, et al. Impact of reported beta-lactam allergy on inpatient outcomes: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63(7):904-910.
Silverman JA, Mortin LI, Vanpraagh AD, Li T, Alder J. Inhibition of daptomycin by pulmonary surfactant: in vitro modeling and clinical impact. J Infect Dis. 2005;191(12):2149-2152.
Pertel PE, Bernardo P, Fogarty C, et al. Effects of prior effective therapy on the efficacy of daptomycin and ceftriaxone for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46(8):1142-1151.
Wacker C, Prkno A, Brunkhorst FM, Schlattmann P. Procalcitonin as a diagnostic marker for sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13(5):426-435.
Schuetz P, Chiappa V, Briel M, Greenwald JL. Procalcitonin algorithms for antibiotic therapy decisions: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and recommendations for clinical algorithms. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(15):1322-1331.
Playford EG, Webster AC, Sorrell TC, Craig JC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of antifungal agents for preventing fungal infections in liver transplant recipients. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2006;25(9):549-561.
Vardakas KZ, Samonis G, Michalopoulos A, Soteriades ES, Falagas ME. Antifungal prophylaxis with azoles in high-risk, surgical intensive care unit patients: a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(4):1216-1224.
Schooley RT, Biswas B, Gill JJ, et al. Development and use of personalized bacteriophage-based therapeutic cocktails to treat a patient with a disseminated resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(10):e00954-17.
Baur D, Gladstone BP, Burkert F, et al. Effect of antibiotic stewardship on the incidence of infection and colonisation with antibiotic-resistant bacteria and Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(9):990-1001.

Abbreviations

ABT - Antibiotic-associated tracheobronchitis ASB - Asymptomatic bacteriuria BAL - Bronchoalveolar lavage CAP - Community-acquired pneumonia CAUTI - Catheter-associated urinary tract infection CDI - Clostridioides difficile infection CFU - Colony-forming units CoNS - Coagulase-negative staphylococci CPIS - Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score CRE - Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae CRP - C-reactive protein CRRT - Continuous renal replacement therapy DRESS - Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms DTP - Differential time to positivity ECMO - Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation GPC-C - Gram-positive cocci in clusters HAP - Hospital-acquired pneumonia ICU - Intensive care unit IDSA - Infectious Diseases Society of America MIC - Minimum inhibitory concentration MRSA - Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus NPV - Negative predictive value PCR - Polymerase chain reaction PCT - Procalcitonin PK/PD - Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics SHEA - Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America TDM - Therapeutic drug monitoring TEN - Toxic epidermal necrolysis UTI - Urinary tract infection VAP - Ventilator-associated pneumonia VRE - Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus WBC - White blood cell count

Disclosure Statement: The author declares no conflicts of interest.

This review article represents current evidence-based practices as of 2025. Clinical guidelines and recommendations evolve continuously; practitioners should consult the most recent literature and institutional protocols when making patient care decisions.

Thursday, October 16, 2025