Department of Infectious Diseases, Australia.
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2009 Dec;22(6):525-34. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0b013e328331fbcd.
The role of vancomycin for treating serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections and the optimal method of administration of anti-Gram-positive antibiotics have been recently questioned. This review summarizes the current literature concerning the use of vancomycin and the role of continuous infusion antimicrobials for treatment of Gram-positive infections.
Although vancomycin-resistant S. aureus due to acquisition of vanA from vancomycin-resistant enterococci remains rare (11 cases to date), heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus and vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus have now been reported from many countries around the world. Laboratory studies have demonstrated subtle, but potentially significant differences in vancomycin susceptibility depending on the methods used, meaning clinicians need to liaise closely with their local microbiology laboratories. Higher vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations within the accepted susceptible range and the presence of vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus are associated with vancomycin treatment failure. It is likely that heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus contributes to treatment failure in patients with serious, high bacterial load infections. Despite the potential limitations of vancomycin, no clinical trials have demonstrated superiority of alternative agents.Administration of antibiotics by continuous infusion is supported by in-vitro and animal studies for the classes of antibiotic that demonstrate time-dependent killing. However, few, limited clinical studies have been performed to date.
Vancomycin remains an important first-line antimicrobial for treatment of serious methicillin-resistant S. aureus infections; however, a detailed analysis of isolate susceptibility and appropriate dosing are important. Although continuous infusion of some anti-Gram-positive antimicrobials may provide theoretical benefits, clinical trials demonstrating superiority in outcomes are uncommon. Use of continuous infusion may, however, provide practical advantages in patients on home intravenous antibiotics.
最近,万古霉素治疗严重耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌感染的作用以及抗革兰氏阳性抗生素的最佳给药方法受到了质疑。本综述总结了关于万古霉素的使用以及连续输注抗菌药物治疗革兰氏阳性感染的作用的最新文献。
尽管由于从万古霉素耐药肠球菌获得 vanA,万古霉素耐药金黄色葡萄球菌仍然很少见(迄今为止有 11 例),但现在已经从世界各地的许多国家报告了异质性万古霉素中介金黄色葡萄球菌和万古霉素中介金黄色葡萄球菌。实验室研究表明,根据所使用的方法,万古霉素的敏感性存在细微但潜在显著的差异,这意味着临床医生需要与当地的微生物学实验室密切合作。在可接受的敏感范围内,较高的万古霉素最小抑菌浓度和存在万古霉素中介金黄色葡萄球菌与万古霉素治疗失败相关。异质性万古霉素中介金黄色葡萄球菌可能导致严重、高细菌负荷感染患者的治疗失败。尽管万古霉素存在潜在的局限性,但没有临床试验证明替代药物具有优越性。
对于表现出时间依赖性杀菌作用的抗生素类别,连续输注抗生素的给药方法得到了体外和动物研究的支持。然而,迄今为止,仅进行了少数有限的临床研究。
万古霉素仍然是治疗严重耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌感染的重要一线抗菌药物;然而,对分离株敏感性的详细分析和适当的剂量很重要。尽管某些抗革兰氏阳性抗生素的连续输注可能具有理论上的优势,但证明在结果方面具有优越性的临床试验并不常见。然而,在接受家庭静脉内抗生素治疗的患者中,连续输注可能具有实际优势。