El Nekidy Wasim S, Abdelsalam Manal M, Nusair Ahmad R, El Lababidi Rania, Dajani Ruba Z, St John Terrence J Lee, Ghazi Islam M
Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Hosp Pharm. 2022 Aug;57(4):568-574. doi: 10.1177/00185787211066460. Epub 2021 Dec 30.
Cefoxitin has shown in vitro activity against Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase (ESBL) producing . Outcome data regarding cefoxitin as a carbapenem sparing agent in the management of urinary tract infections (UTI) are scarce. We sought to evaluate the clinical and microbiologic efficacy of cefoxitin as compared to ertapenem. A retrospective observational study was conducted at our quaternary care institution between May 2015 and March 2019. We identified all patients who received cefoxitin for the treatment of UTI during the study period and used Charlson Comorbidity Index to select a matching cohort from patients who received ertapenem. Primary end points were clinical and microbiological cure. Thirty patients who received cefoxitin were matched with 55 patients who received ertapenem. Clinical cure was marginally in favor of ertapenem: 83.2% in cefoxitin group versus 96.8% in ertapenem group ( = .042). However, 90-day recurrence was in favor of cefoxitin: 13.5% in cefoxitin group versus 34.8% in ertapenem group ( = .045). Microbiologic cure was not significant between the 2 groups with 88.6% success in cefoxitin versus 100% in ertapenem. Additionally, the group difference on 30-day recurrence or relapse rates and the 90-day mortality rate were not clinically significant. Cefoxitin achieved similar microbiologic cure rate when compared to ertapenem for the treatment of UTI caused by ESBL-producing No significant differences were found in 30-day recurrence/relapse or mortality rates. Larger randomized controlled trials are required to identify the clinical sittings in which cefoxitin could be used as a carbapenem-sparing agent in the treatment of UTI.
头孢西丁已显示出对产超广谱β-内酰胺酶(ESBL)菌株的体外活性。关于头孢西丁作为碳青霉烯类药物替代剂用于治疗尿路感染(UTI)的疗效数据较少。我们试图评估头孢西丁与厄他培南相比的临床和微生物学疗效。2015年5月至2019年3月在我们的四级医疗机构进行了一项回顾性观察研究。我们确定了研究期间所有接受头孢西丁治疗UTI的患者,并使用Charlson合并症指数从接受厄他培南治疗的患者中选择匹配队列。主要终点是临床和微生物学治愈。30例接受头孢西丁治疗的患者与55例接受厄他培南治疗的患者相匹配。临床治愈率略倾向于厄他培南:头孢西丁组为83.2%,厄他培南组为96.8%(P = 0.042)。然而,90天复发率有利于头孢西丁:头孢西丁组为13.5%,厄他培南组为34.8%(P = 0.045)。两组间微生物学治愈率无显著差异,头孢西丁组成功率为88.6%,厄他培南组为100%。此外,两组在30天复发或复发率以及90天死亡率方面的差异无临床意义。与厄他培南相比,头孢西丁在治疗产ESBL菌株引起的UTI时达到了相似的微生物学治愈率。在30天复发/复发率或死亡率方面未发现显著差异。需要更大规模的随机对照试验来确定在哪些临床情况下头孢西丁可作为碳青霉烯类药物替代剂用于治疗UTI。