Efficacy and safety of antistaphylococcal penicilin or cephazolin-based combinations versus monotherapy for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis. A propensity score analysis of nationwide prospective cohort.

IF 14.3 1区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Jorge Calderón-Parra, Sara Grillo, Patricia Muñoz, Marina Machado-Vilchez, Antonia Delgado-Montero, Arístides De Alarcón-González, Manuel Poyato-Borrego, M A Goenaga-Sánchez, M Carmen Fariñas-Alvarez, José M Miró, Luis Eduardo López-Cortés, Raquel Rodríguez-García, José A Oteo, Antonio Martínez-Ramos
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of antistaphylococcal penicilin or cephazolin-based combinations versus monotherapy for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis. A propensity score analysis of nationwide prospective cohort.","authors":"Jorge Calderón-Parra, Sara Grillo, Patricia Muñoz, Marina Machado-Vilchez, Antonia Delgado-Montero, Arístides De Alarcón-González, Manuel Poyato-Borrego, M A Goenaga-Sánchez, M Carmen Fariñas-Alvarez, José M Miró, Luis Eduardo López-Cortés, Raquel Rodríguez-García, José A Oteo, Antonio Martínez-Ramos","doi":"10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the usefulness of antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP) or cephazolin-based combinations versus monotherapy in patients with native-valve infective endocarditis (IE) caused by methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Post-hoc analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort. We include patients from 2008 to 2022, with definite native-valve, left-side IE due to MSSA treated primarily with ASP/cephazolin. Patients were categorized according to whether they initially received monotherapy or combination therapy for more than 72 hours. A propensity score-matched cohort was planned.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 420 included cases, 94 (22.4%) received monotherapy and 326 (77.6%) combination. Median combination duration was 14 days (interquartile range 10-20). Sixty-eight combination cases were matched with 68 monotherapy controls. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. There were no differences in in-hospital or one-year mortality between groups (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.33-2.18 and HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.35-1.31, respectively). Endocarditis relapses and persistent bacteraemia rates were similar (0% vs 1.5%, p=1.000; and 19.1% vs 13.2%, p=0.352, respectively). Drug-related adverse events were more frequent in combination group (15.0% vs 1.1%, p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Antibiotic combination for patients with native valve left-sided MSSA endocarditis did not improve patient's outcomes. Drug-related adverse events were more frequent in combination patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":50180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Infection","volume":" ","pages":"106352"},"PeriodicalIF":14.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106352","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the usefulness of antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP) or cephazolin-based combinations versus monotherapy in patients with native-valve infective endocarditis (IE) caused by methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA).

Methods: Post-hoc analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort. We include patients from 2008 to 2022, with definite native-valve, left-side IE due to MSSA treated primarily with ASP/cephazolin. Patients were categorized according to whether they initially received monotherapy or combination therapy for more than 72 hours. A propensity score-matched cohort was planned.

Results: Out of 420 included cases, 94 (22.4%) received monotherapy and 326 (77.6%) combination. Median combination duration was 14 days (interquartile range 10-20). Sixty-eight combination cases were matched with 68 monotherapy controls. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. There were no differences in in-hospital or one-year mortality between groups (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.33-2.18 and HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.35-1.31, respectively). Endocarditis relapses and persistent bacteraemia rates were similar (0% vs 1.5%, p=1.000; and 19.1% vs 13.2%, p=0.352, respectively). Drug-related adverse events were more frequent in combination group (15.0% vs 1.1%, p<0.001).

Conclusions: Antibiotic combination for patients with native valve left-sided MSSA endocarditis did not improve patient's outcomes. Drug-related adverse events were more frequent in combination patients.

以抗葡萄球菌青霉素或头孢唑啉为基础的联合疗法与单一疗法治疗甲氧西林易感金黄色葡萄球菌感染性心内膜炎的疗效和安全性。全国前瞻性队列的倾向得分分析。
研究目的我们旨在评估甲氧西林易感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)引起的原生瓣膜感染性心内膜炎(IE)患者使用抗葡萄球菌青霉素(ASP)或头孢唑啉联合疗法与单药治疗的效果:多中心前瞻性队列的事后分析。方法:对多中心前瞻性队列进行事后分析。我们纳入了 2008 年至 2022 年期间因 MSSA 而确诊为原生瓣膜左侧 IE 的患者,他们主要接受了 ASP/cephazolin 治疗。根据患者最初接受单药治疗还是72小时以上的联合治疗进行分类。计划建立倾向评分匹配队列:在纳入的 420 例患者中,94 例(22.4%)接受了单一疗法,326 例(77.6%)接受了联合疗法。联合治疗的中位持续时间为 14 天(四分位数间距为 10-20)。68 例联合用药病例与 68 例单一疗法对照组进行了配对。基线特征非常均衡。两组患者的院内死亡率和一年死亡率无差异(OR 0.85,95%CI 0.33-2.18;HR 0.68,95%CI 0.35-1.31)。心内膜炎复发率和持续菌血症率相似(分别为0% vs 1.5%,p=1.000;19.1% vs 13.2%,p=0.352)。联合用药组的药物相关不良事件发生率更高(15.0% 对 1.1%,P=0.352):对原生瓣左侧MSSA心内膜炎患者联合使用抗生素并不能改善患者的预后。联合用药组患者发生药物相关不良事件的频率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Infection
Journal of Infection 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
45.90
自引率
3.20%
发文量
475
审稿时长
16 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Infection publishes original papers on all aspects of infection - clinical, microbiological and epidemiological. The Journal seeks to bring together knowledge from all specialties involved in infection research and clinical practice, and present the best work in the ever-changing field of infection. Each issue brings you Editorials that describe current or controversial topics of interest, high quality Reviews to keep you in touch with the latest developments in specific fields of interest, an Epidemiology section reporting studies in the hospital and the general community, and a lively correspondence section.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信