Ceftriaxone versus tazobactam/piperacillin and carbapenems in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia: A propensity score matching analysis.

INTRODUCTION

Aspiration pneumonia (AP) accounts for 5.0-53.2% of hospitalized pneumonia and the treatment commonly used is by broad-spectrum antibiotics to cover anaerobes. Since ceftriaxone (CTRX) could generally cover oral streptococcus and anaerobes implicated in AP, it could be a useful option in the treatment of AP, instead of piperacillin-tazobactam/(PIPC/TAZ) or Carbapenems.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

For the purpose of examining whether CTRX is as effective as broad-spectrum antibiotics for the treatment of AP, this retrospective study included consecutive community-onset patients who were admitted to our institute between 2014 and 2017. These patients were divided into two groups, a CTRX group (n = 25) and a PIPC/TAZ or carbapenems group (n = 97) based on the initial antibiotic treatment. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the potential confounders, and 23 patients were selected from each group. Patients among CTXR group received CTRX, while those among PIPC/TAZ or carbapenems group received PIPC/TAZ, or carbapenems and/or other agents.

RESULTS

Both groups were well-balanced after PSM. There were no differences in 30-day mortality, duration of hospital stay or antibiotic treatments in the between them. The medical costs were much more expensive in the PIPC/TAZ or carbapenems group than in the CTR group (35,582 v. s. 8678 Japanese yen, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

CTRX is one of the most useful antibiotic treatment for AP, which is not inferior to broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment. In addition, usage of CTRX in the treatment of AP is more economical than broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment, and could contribute to reduction of medical costs.