Department of Pharmacy, Lt. Col. Luke Weathers Jr. VA Medical Center, Memphis, Tennessee.
Department of Pharmacy Practice, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri.
Clin Ther. 2024 Apr;46(4):338-344. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.01.009. Epub 2024 Feb 24.
Consensus guidelines for hospitalized, non-severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) recommend empiric macrolide + β-lactam or respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy in patients with no risk factors for resistant organisms. In patients with allergies or contraindications, doxycycline + β-lactam is a recommended alternative. The purpose of this study was to compare differences in outcomes among guideline-recommended regimens in this population.
This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included patients ≥18 years of age with CAP who received respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy, empiric macrolide + β-lactam, or doxycycline + β-lactam. Major exclusion criteria included patients with immunocompromising conditions, requiring vasopressors or invasive mechanical ventilation within 48 hours of admission, and receiving less than 2 days of total antibiotic therapy. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical failure, 14- and 30-day hospital readmission, and hospital length of stay. Safety outcomes included incidence of new Clostridioides difficile infection and aortic aneurysm ruptures.
Of 4685 included patients, 1722 patients received empiric respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy, 159 received empiric doxycycline + β-lactam, and 2804 received empiric macrolide + β-lactam. Incidence of in-hospital mortality was not observed to be significantly different among empiric regimens (doxycycline + β-lactam group: 1.9% vs macrolide + β-lactam: 1.9% vs respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy: 1.5%, P = 0.588). No secondary outcomes were observed to differ significantly among groups.
We observed no differences in clinical or safety outcomes among three guideline-recommended empiric CAP regimens. Empiric doxycycline + β-lactam may be a safe empiric regimen for hospitalized CAP patients with non-severe CAP, although additional research is needed to corroborate these observations with larger samples.
针对无耐药菌感染风险因素的住院非重症社区获得性肺炎(CAP)患者,临床实践指南建议使用经验性大环内酯类药物+β-内酰胺类药物或呼吸氟喹诺酮类单药治疗。对于过敏或禁忌使用上述药物的患者,推荐使用多西环素+β-内酰胺类药物。本研究旨在比较该人群中指南推荐方案的治疗结局差异。
这是一项回顾性多中心队列研究,纳入了接受呼吸氟喹诺酮类单药治疗、经验性大环内酯类药物+β-内酰胺类药物或多西环素+β-内酰胺类药物治疗的≥18 岁 CAP 患者。主要排除标准包括免疫功能低下的患者、入院后 48 小时内需要使用升压药或有创机械通气的患者以及接受少于 2 天抗生素治疗的患者。主要结局为住院期间死亡率。次要结局包括临床治疗失败、14 天和 30 天再入院以及住院时间。安全性结局包括新出现的艰难梭菌感染和主动脉瘤破裂的发生率。
在纳入的 4685 例患者中,1722 例患者接受了经验性呼吸氟喹诺酮类单药治疗,159 例患者接受了经验性多西环素+β-内酰胺类药物治疗,2804 例患者接受了经验性大环内酯类药物+β-内酰胺类药物治疗。经验性治疗方案之间的住院死亡率无显著差异(多西环素+β-内酰胺类药物组:1.9%,大环内酯类药物+β-内酰胺类药物组:1.9%,呼吸氟喹诺酮类单药治疗组:1.5%,P=0.588)。各组之间的次要结局无显著差异。
在三种指南推荐的经验性 CAP 治疗方案中,我们观察到临床和安全性结局无差异。对于非重症 CAP 住院患者,经验性使用多西环素+β-内酰胺类药物可能是一种安全的经验性治疗方案,尽管需要进一步的研究来证实这些观察结果并扩大样本量。