Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
General Hospital Dubrovnik, Department of Infectious Diseases, University of Dubrovnik, Dubrovnik, Croatia.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022 Sep 30;77(10):2827-2834. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkac237.
To determine clinical practice variation and identify knowledge gaps in antibiotic treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB).
A web-based survey with questions addressing antibiotic treatment of SAB was distributed through the ESGAP network among infectious disease specialists, clinical microbiologists and internists in Croatia, France, Greece, the Netherlands and the UK between July 2021 and November 2021.
A total number of 1687 respondents opened the survey link, of whom 677 (40%) answered at least one question. For MSSA and MRSA bacteraemia, 98% and 94% preferred initial monotherapy, respectively. In patients with SAB and non-removable infected prosthetic material, between 80% and 90% would use rifampicin as part of the treatment. For bone and joint infections, 65%-77% of respondents would consider oral step-down therapy, but for endovascular infections only 12%-32% would. Respondents recommended widely varying treatment durations for SAB with different foci of infection. Overall, 48% stated they used 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT (18F-FDG-PET/CT) to guide antibiotic treatment duration. Persistent bacteraemia was the only risk factor for complicated SAB that would prompt a majority to extend treatment from 2 to 4-6 weeks.
This survey in five European countries shows considerable clinical practice variation between and within countries in the antibiotic management of SAB, in particular regarding oral step-down therapy, choice of oral antibiotic agents, treatment duration and use of 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Physicians use varying criteria for treatment decisions, as evidence from clinical trials is often lacking. These areas of practice variation could be used to prioritize future studies for further improvement of SAB care.
确定治疗金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症(SAB)的抗生素治疗的临床实践差异并识别知识空白。
通过 ESGAP 网络在克罗地亚、法国、希腊、荷兰和英国的传染病专家、临床微生物学家和内科医生中开展了一项基于网络的调查,调查内容为 SAB 的抗生素治疗。该调查于 2021 年 7 月至 11 月进行。
共有 1687 名受访者打开了调查链接,其中 677 人(40%)至少回答了一个问题。对于 MSSA 和 MRSA 菌血症,分别有 98%和 94%的人首选初始单药治疗。对于 SAB 合并不可移除的感染性假体材料的患者,80%至 90%的人会使用利福平作为治疗的一部分。对于骨和关节感染,65%-77%的受访者会考虑口服降阶梯治疗,但对于血管内感染,只有 12%-32%的人会考虑。受访者推荐对不同感染部位的 SAB 采用不同的治疗时间。总体而言,48%的受访者表示他们使用 18F-氟脱氧葡萄糖正电子发射断层扫描/计算机断层扫描(18F-FDG-PET/CT)来指导抗生素治疗时间。持续性菌血症是导致复杂 SAB 的唯一危险因素,促使大多数人将治疗时间从 2 周延长至 4-6 周。
这项在五个欧洲国家进行的调查显示,在 SAB 的抗生素管理方面,国家之间和国家内部的临床实践存在很大差异,特别是在口服降阶梯治疗、口服抗生素药物的选择、治疗持续时间以及 18F-FDG-PET/CT 的使用方面。医生在治疗决策中使用不同的标准,因为临床试验的证据往往缺乏。这些实践差异领域可用于确定未来研究的优先顺序,以进一步改善 SAB 的治疗。