Conaughty Jason M, Chen Jack, Martinez Octavio V, Chiappetta Gino, Brookfield Kathleen F, Eismont Frank J
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, MCE South Tower, Suite 400, Nashville, TN 37203, USA.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Oct 15;31(22):E830-2. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000241065.19723.13.
A rabbit model was used to assess the efficacy of linezolid and vancomycin for the treatment of discitis due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Nontreated controls were used for comparison.
The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a therapeutic difference between using linezolid and vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA discitis.
Vancomycin is currently the gold standard treatment for medical management of MRSA discitis. Linezolid is a relatively new drug that has been approved for treatment of MRSA infections, but currently there is no research demonstrating its efficacy at treating infections of the disc space.
Twenty-four rabbits were inoculated with MRSA at two adjacent lumbar disc spaces via an anterior retroperitoneal approach. Six rabbits were to receive only pain medication and to serve as controls. Ten rabbits were assigned to a 5-day course of intravenous vancomycin, and 8 were assigned to a 5-day course of intravenous linezolid. Disc spaces were sent for quantitative culture after the 5-day treatment course.
The mean culture growth for the disc spaces was not statistically different between the linezolid treated group and the nontreated controls. While vancomycin treatment did lead to lower bacterial loads when compared with controls, the reduction was not statistically significant. When bacterial counts for the vancomycin group and linezolid group were compared, vancomycin treatment resulted in less bacterial growth. This difference was statistically significant.
Linezolid is a clinically attractive alternative to vancomycin due to its mild side effect profile and oral bioavailability. However, in this MRSA discitis model with a short treatment course, vancomycin was superior to linezolid.
采用兔模型评估利奈唑胺和万古霉素治疗耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)所致椎间盘炎的疗效。设置未治疗的对照组进行比较。
本研究旨在确定利奈唑胺和万古霉素治疗MRSA椎间盘炎是否存在治疗差异。
万古霉素目前是MRSA椎间盘炎药物治疗的金标准。利奈唑胺是一种相对较新的已被批准用于治疗MRSA感染的药物,但目前尚无研究证明其治疗椎间盘间隙感染的疗效。
通过腹膜后前路途径在24只兔的两个相邻腰椎间盘间隙接种MRSA。6只兔仅接受止痛药物作为对照。10只兔接受为期5天的静脉注射万古霉素治疗,8只兔接受为期5天的静脉注射利奈唑胺治疗。5天治疗疗程结束后,将椎间盘间隙送去进行定量培养。
利奈唑胺治疗组与未治疗对照组之间椎间盘间隙的平均培养生长无统计学差异。虽然与对照组相比,万古霉素治疗确实导致细菌载量降低,但降低幅度无统计学意义。比较万古霉素组和利奈唑胺组的细菌计数时,万古霉素治疗导致的细菌生长较少。这种差异具有统计学意义。
利奈唑胺因其副作用轻微和口服生物利用度高,是临床上有吸引力的万古霉素替代药物。然而,在这个治疗疗程较短的MRSA椎间盘炎模型中,万古霉素优于利奈唑胺。