Teicoplanin vs vancomycin: cost-effectiveness comparisons.

Hospital formulary Pub Date : 1993-01-01
M J Rybak
{"title":"Teicoplanin vs vancomycin: cost-effectiveness comparisons.","authors":"M J Rybak","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rising incidence of methicillin-resistant staphylococci and resistant enterococci in recent years has led to increased use of vancomycin as an active combatant in the treatment of gram-positive infections. Teicoplanin is an investigational glycopeptide that shares a similar spectrum of activity with vancomycin and appears to have similar efficacy. Teicoplanin offers several theoretical advantages compared with vancomycin including once-daily dosing, fewer side effects, and the option for intramuscular administration. While these may be perceived as substantial advances in the glycopeptide class of antibiotics, teicoplanin will probably not replace the now generically available vancomycin on hospital formularies. If competitively priced as a once-daily dosing regimen, teicoplanin will likely gain initial acceptance as an alternative in patients with an intolerance to vancomycin infusion-related side effects or in patients placed on combination aminoglycoside therapy for extended periods of treatment, as an intramuscular antibiotic in patients with poor venous access, and for routine antibiotic prophylaxis where protection from resistant gram-positive pathogens is important. The use of teicoplanin in the hospital may become more widespread as its side effect profile and economic advantages of less frequent dosing compared with vancomycin become better understood.</p>","PeriodicalId":76912,"journal":{"name":"Hospital formulary","volume":"28 Suppl 1 ","pages":"28-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital formulary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rising incidence of methicillin-resistant staphylococci and resistant enterococci in recent years has led to increased use of vancomycin as an active combatant in the treatment of gram-positive infections. Teicoplanin is an investigational glycopeptide that shares a similar spectrum of activity with vancomycin and appears to have similar efficacy. Teicoplanin offers several theoretical advantages compared with vancomycin including once-daily dosing, fewer side effects, and the option for intramuscular administration. While these may be perceived as substantial advances in the glycopeptide class of antibiotics, teicoplanin will probably not replace the now generically available vancomycin on hospital formularies. If competitively priced as a once-daily dosing regimen, teicoplanin will likely gain initial acceptance as an alternative in patients with an intolerance to vancomycin infusion-related side effects or in patients placed on combination aminoglycoside therapy for extended periods of treatment, as an intramuscular antibiotic in patients with poor venous access, and for routine antibiotic prophylaxis where protection from resistant gram-positive pathogens is important. The use of teicoplanin in the hospital may become more widespread as its side effect profile and economic advantages of less frequent dosing compared with vancomycin become better understood.

替可普兰与万古霉素:成本-效果比较。
近年来耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌和耐药肠球菌的发病率不断上升,导致万古霉素作为治疗革兰氏阳性感染的积极战斗员的使用增加。Teicoplanin是一种正在研究的糖肽,与万古霉素具有相似的活性谱,似乎具有相似的功效。与万古霉素相比,替柯planin在理论上有几个优势,包括每日一次给药,副作用更少,可以选择肌内给药。虽然这些可能被认为是糖肽类抗生素的重大进步,但teicoplanin可能不会取代医院处方上现在普遍可用的万古霉素。如果将teicoplanin作为每日一次的给药方案进行有竞争力的定价,teicoplanin可能会在对万古霉素输注相关副作用不耐受的患者或长期接受氨基糖苷联合治疗的患者中作为一种替代方案,在静脉通道不良的患者中作为肌内抗生素,以及在对耐药革兰氏阳性病原体的保护很重要的情况下作为常规抗生素预防。随着对替柯planin的副作用和较低剂量与万古霉素相比的经济优势的进一步了解,替柯planin在医院的使用可能会更加广泛。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信