Suppr超能文献

利奈唑胺与达托霉素治疗人工关节假体周围感染的回顾性队列研究。

Linezolid versus daptomycin treatment for periprosthetic joint infections: a retrospective cohort study.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kansai Medical University, 2-5-1 Shinmachi, Hirakata, Osaka, 573-1010, Japan.

出版信息

J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Oct 24;14(1):334. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1375-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Linezolid (LZD) and daptomycin (DAP) are predominantly used to target gram-positive pathogens; however, treatment effectiveness and adverse reactions for periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) remain unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and adverse reactions of LZD and DAP for PJIs.

METHODS

This study retrospectively evaluated 82 patients between June 2009 and December 2017, to compare the effectiveness of LZD (group L, n = 39) and DAP (group D, n = 43) for treatment of PJIs harboring gram-positive microorganisms. Surgical options used with LZD or DAP therapy included implant retention, implant removal, and a shift to another appropriate antibiotic. Infection control was defined as not requiring implant removal after the final treatment.

RESULTS

Gram-positive pathogens were isolated from 72% of group L and 70% of group D patients, respectively. Whole infection control rates against gram-positive pathogens in groups L and D were 79% and 77%, respectively. Furthermore, infection control rates were 94% and 58% in group L and 75% and 80% in group D, without and with implant removal, respectively. Significantly higher clinical success rates and lower adverse event rates were observed in group D, including higher red blood cell and platelet counts and lower C-reactive protein (CRP) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the effectiveness of LZD and DAP was equivalent in terms of infection control rates for refractory PJIs with gram-positive pathogens, DAP therapy significantly decreased CRP levels and caused fewer adverse events than LZD treatment.

摘要

背景

利奈唑胺(LZD)和达托霉素(DAP)主要用于靶向革兰阳性病原体;然而,针对假体周围关节感染(PJI)的治疗效果和不良反应仍不清楚。本研究旨在比较 LZD 和 DAP 治疗 PJI 的效果和不良反应。

方法

本研究回顾性评估了 2009 年 6 月至 2017 年 12 月间的 82 例患者,比较了利奈唑胺(L 组,n=39)和达托霉素(D 组,n=43)治疗携带革兰阳性微生物的 PJI 的效果。LZD 或 DAP 治疗中使用的手术方案包括保留植入物、移除植入物以及改用另一种合适的抗生素。感染控制定义为最终治疗后无需移除植入物。

结果

L 组和 D 组患者分别分离出 72%和 70%的革兰阳性病原体。L 组和 D 组针对革兰阳性病原体的整体感染控制率分别为 79%和 77%。此外,L 组和 D 组在不切除和切除植入物的情况下,感染控制率分别为 94%和 58%和 75%和 80%。D 组的临床成功率更高,不良事件发生率更低,包括更高的红细胞和血小板计数以及更低的 C 反应蛋白(CRP)水平。

结论

尽管 LZD 和 DAP 在控制耐多药革兰阳性病原体 PJI 的感染率方面效果相当,但与 LZD 治疗相比,DAP 治疗可显著降低 CRP 水平并减少不良事件。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/37ea/6814137/697790ec9ca8/13018_2019_1375_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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