Britt Nicholas S, Potter Emily M, Patel Nimish, Steed Molly E
Department of Pharmacy, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Research Department, Dwight D. Eisenhower Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Leavenworth, Kansas, USA.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Apr 24;61(5). doi: 10.1128/AAC.02216-16. Print 2017 May.
Vancomycin-resistant bloodstream infections (VREF-BSI) cause significant mortality, highlighting the need to optimize their treatment. We compared the effectiveness and safety of daptomycin (DAP) and linezolid (LZD) as continuous or sequential therapy for VREF-BSI in a national, retrospective, propensity score (PS)-matched cohort study of hospitalized Veterans Affairs patients (2004 to 2014). We compared clinical outcomes and adverse events among patients treated with continuous LZD, continuous DAP, or sequential LZD followed by DAP (LZD-to-DAP). Secondarily, we analyzed the impact of infectious diseases (ID) consultation and source of VREF-BSI. A total of 2,630 patients were included in the effectiveness analysis (LZD [ = 1,348], DAP [ = 1,055], LZD-to-DAP [ = 227]). LZD was associated with increased 30-day mortality versus DAP (risk ratio [RR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.22; = 0.042). After PS matching, this relationship persisted (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.26; = 0.015). LZD-to-DAP switchers had lower mortality than those remaining on LZD (RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.63; = 0.021), suggesting a benefit may still be derived with sequential therapy. LZD-treated patients experienced more adverse events, including a ≥50% reduction in platelets (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.11; = 0.001). DAP was associated with lower mortality than was LZD in patients with endocarditis (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.41; = 0.024); however, there was no statistically significant association between treatment group and mortality with regard to other sources of infection. Therefore, source of infection appears to be important in selection of patients most likely to benefit from DAP over LZD.
耐万古霉素血流感染(VREF - BSI)会导致显著的死亡率,这凸显了优化其治疗方法的必要性。在一项针对退伍军人事务部住院患者(2004年至2014年)的全国性回顾性倾向评分(PS)匹配队列研究中,我们比较了达托霉素(DAP)和利奈唑胺(LZD)作为VREF - BSI持续治疗或序贯治疗的有效性和安全性。我们比较了接受持续LZD、持续DAP或序贯LZD后改用DAP(LZD至DAP)治疗的患者的临床结局和不良事件。其次,我们分析了感染病(ID)会诊以及VREF - BSI来源的影响。共有2630名患者纳入有效性分析(LZD组[ = 1348],DAP组[ = 1055],LZD至DAP组[ = 227])。与DAP相比,LZD与30天死亡率增加相关(风险比[RR],1.11;95%置信区间[CI],1.01至1.22; = 0.042)。PS匹配后,这种关系仍然存在(RR,1.13;95%CI,1.02至1.26; = 0.015)。从LZD改用DAP的患者死亡率低于继续使用LZD的患者(RR,1.29;95%CI,1.03至1.63; = 0.021),这表明序贯治疗可能仍有获益。接受LZD治疗的患者发生更多不良事件,包括血小板减少≥50%(RR,1.07;95%CI,1.03至1.11; = 0.001)。在患有心内膜炎的患者中,DAP与低于LZD的死亡率相关(RR,1.20;95%CI,1.02至1.41; = 0.024);然而,就其他感染来源而言,治疗组与死亡率之间无统计学显著关联。因此,在选择最有可能从DAP而非LZD治疗中获益的患者时,感染源似乎很重要。