Belforti Raquel K, Lagu Tara, Haessler Sarah, Lindenauer Peter K, Pekow Penelope S, Priya Aruna, Zilberberg Marya D, Skiest Daniel, Higgins Thomas L, Stefan Mihaela S, Rothberg Michael B
Division of General Medicine and Community Health, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield.
Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston.
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Jul 1;63(1):1-9. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw209. Epub 2016 Apr 5.
Fluoroquinolones have equivalent oral and intravenous bioavailability, but hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) generally are treated intravenously. Our objectives were to compare outcomes of hospitalized CAP patients initially receiving intravenous vs oral respiratory fluoroquinolones.
This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from 340 hospitals involving CAP patients admitted to a non-intensive care unit (ICU) setting from 2007 to 2010, who received intravenous or oral levofloxacin or moxifloxacin. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical deterioration (transfer to ICU, initiation of vasopressors, or invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV] initiated after the second hospital day), antibiotic escalation, length of stay (LOS), and cost.
Of 36 405 patients who met inclusion criteria, 34 200 (94%) initially received intravenous treatment and 2205 (6%) received oral treatment. Patients who received oral fluoroquinolones had lower unadjusted mortality (1.4% vs 2.5%; P = .002), and shorter mean LOS (5.0 vs 5.3; P < .001). Multivariable models using stabilized inverse propensity treatment weighting revealed lower rates of antibiotic escalation for oral vs intravenous therapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], .74-.96) but no differences in hospital mortality (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, .58-1.15), LOS (difference in days 0.03; 95% CI, -.09-.15), cost (difference in $-7.7; 95% CI, -197.4-182.0), late ICU admission (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, .80-1.36), late IMV (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, .87-1.56), or late vasopressor use (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, .68-1.30).
Among hospitalized patients who received fluoroquinolones for CAP, there was no association between initial route of administration and outcomes. More patients may be treated orally without worsening outcomes.
氟喹诺酮类药物口服和静脉给药的生物利用度相当,但社区获得性肺炎(CAP)的住院患者通常采用静脉给药治疗。我们的目的是比较最初接受静脉注射与口服呼吸氟喹诺酮类药物治疗的CAP住院患者的治疗结果。
这是一项回顾性队列研究,利用了来自340家医院的数据,这些数据涉及2007年至2010年入住非重症监护病房(ICU)的CAP患者,他们接受了静脉注射或口服左氧氟沙星或莫西沙星治疗。主要结局是住院死亡率。次要结局包括临床恶化(转至ICU、开始使用血管加压药或在入院第二天后开始有创机械通气[IMV])、抗生素升级、住院时间(LOS)和费用。
在36405名符合纳入标准的患者中,34200名(94%)最初接受静脉治疗,2205名(6%)接受口服治疗。接受口服氟喹诺酮类药物治疗的患者未经调整的死亡率较低(1.4%对2.5%;P = 0.002),平均住院时间较短(5.0天对5.3天;P < 0.001)。使用稳定的逆倾向治疗加权的多变量模型显示,口服治疗与静脉治疗相比,抗生素升级率较低(优势比[OR],0.84;95%置信区间[CI],0.74 - 0.96),但住院死亡率(OR,0.82;95% CI,0.58 - 1.15)、住院时间(天数差异0.03;95% CI,-0.09 - 0.15)、费用(差异-7.7美元;95% CI,-197.4 - 182.0)、晚期入住ICU(OR,1.04;95% CI,0.80 - 1.36)、晚期IMV(OR,1.17;95% CI,0.87 - 1.56)或晚期使用血管加压药(OR,0.94;95% CI,0.68 - 1.30)方面没有差异。
在接受氟喹诺酮类药物治疗CAP的住院患者中,初始给药途径与治疗结果之间没有关联。更多患者可以接受口服治疗而不会使结果恶化。