Suppr超能文献

经验性使用利奈唑胺治疗发热性血液学和造血干细胞移植患者,这些患者定植了耐万古霉素肠球菌。

Empiric use of linezolid in febrile hematology and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients colonized with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp.

机构信息

Transplant Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Department of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Apr;33:171-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2015.02.001. Epub 2015 Feb 7.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a retrospective study on the impact of the empiric use of linezolid on mortality in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp (VRE)-colonized hematology and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients.

METHODS

VRE-colonized inpatients for whom complete data were available (n=100) were divided into two groups: those who received empiric linezolid in the course of fever refractory to broad-spectrum antibiotics, replacing the glycopeptide utilized for the previous 48 h, and those who did not (control group). All patients were followed until hospital discharge or death. The impact of linezolid and risk factors for all-cause mortality were evaluated; variables with p<0.10 were analyzed in a multivariate model. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was done to compare survival among febrile patients colonized by VRE who received empiric linezolid with patients who did not receive linezolid.

RESULTS

Patients empirically prescribed linezolid were generally younger (median age 33 vs. 44 years; p=0.008) and more likely to be recipients of an allogeneic HSCT (24 (68.6%) vs. 24 (36.9%); p=0.009) than patients who did not receive the drug. Fourteen (21.5%) VRE bloodstream infections were diagnosed, all in patients who did not receive empiric linezolid (p=0.002). In-hospital mortality was comparable in empiric linezolid and non-linezolid users (19 (54.3%) vs. 27 (41.5%), respectively; p=0.293). The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no significant difference in survival comparing the group that received linezolid to the group that did not (p=0.72). Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD; odds ratio (OR) 5.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-23.79; p=0.012) and persistence of neutropenia (OR 6.93, 95% CI 1.72-27.94; p=0.0065) were independent predictors of all-cause in-hospital death in HSCT patients, and persistence of neutropenia in non-HSCT patients (OR 8.12, 95% CI 1.22-53.8; p=0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

The empiric use of linezolid in VRE-colonized hematology patients had no impact on mortality, which appeared rather to be associated with the persistence of neutropenia in general and GVHD in the HSCT group.

摘要

目的

我们对经验性使用利奈唑胺对万古霉素耐药肠球菌属(VRE)定植的血液科和造血干细胞移植(HSCT)患者死亡率的影响进行了回顾性研究。

方法

将 VRE 定植且资料完整的住院患者(n=100)分为两组:一组在广谱抗生素治疗发热无效时经验性使用利奈唑胺,替代之前使用的 48 小时的糖肽类药物;另一组为对照组。所有患者均随访至出院或死亡。评估利奈唑胺的影响和全因死亡率的危险因素;p<0.10 的变量在多变量模型中进行分析。对接受经验性利奈唑胺治疗的 VRE 定植发热患者与未接受利奈唑胺治疗的患者进行 Kaplan-Meier 生存分析,比较生存情况。

结果

接受经验性利奈唑胺治疗的患者通常年龄较小(中位年龄 33 岁 vs. 44 岁;p=0.008),且更可能是异基因 HSCT 受者(24(68.6%)vs. 24(36.9%);p=0.009)。14 例(21.5%)诊断为 VRE 血流感染,均发生在未接受经验性利奈唑胺治疗的患者中(p=0.002)。经验性利奈唑胺组和非利奈唑胺组的院内死亡率相似(19(54.3%)vs. 27(41.5%);p=0.293)。Kaplan-Meier 生存分析显示,接受利奈唑胺治疗组与未接受利奈唑胺治疗组的生存情况无显著差异(p=0.72)。HSCT 患者中,移植物抗宿主病(GVHD;比值比(OR)5.90,95%置信区间(CI)1.46-23.79;p=0.012)和中性粒细胞持续减少(OR 6.93,95%CI 1.72-27.94;p=0.0065)是全因院内死亡的独立预测因素,而非 HSCT 患者中中性粒细胞持续减少(OR 8.12,95%CI 1.22-53.8;p=0.030)。

结论

经验性使用利奈唑胺治疗 VRE 定植的血液科患者的死亡率没有影响,死亡率似乎与中性粒细胞持续减少有关,在 HSCT 患者中与 GVHD 有关。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验