Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham 27710, NC, USA.
Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2024 Jun 3;79(6):1456-1461. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkae134.
A small proportion of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae demonstrate in vitro non-susceptibility to piperacillin/tazobactam but retain susceptibility to ceftriaxone. Uncertainty remains regarding how best to treat these isolates.
We sought to compare clinical outcomes between patients with piperacillin/tazobactam-non-susceptible but ceftriaxone-susceptible E. coli or K. pneumoniae bloodstream infection receiving definitive therapy with ceftriaxone versus an alternative effective antibiotic.
We retrospectively identified patients with a positive blood culture for piperacillin/tazobactam-non-susceptible but ceftriaxone-susceptible E. coli or K. pneumoniae between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2022. Patients were divided into one of two definitive treatment groups: ceftriaxone or alternative effective antibiotic. Our primary outcome was a composite of 90 day all-cause mortality, hospital readmission, or recurrence of infection. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare time with the composite outcome between groups.
Sixty-two patients were included in our analysis. Overall, median age was 63 years (IQR 49.5-71.0), the most common source of infection was intra-abdominal (25/62; 40.3%) and the median total duration of therapy was 12.0 days (IQR 9.0-16.8). A total of 9/22 (40.9%) patients in the ceftriaxone treatment group and 18/40 (45.0%) patients in the alternative effective antibiotic group met the composite endpoint. In an adjusted time-to-event analysis, there was no difference in the composite endpoint between groups (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30-1.50). The adjusted Bayesian posterior probability that the HR was less than or equal to 1 (i.e. ceftriaxone is as good or better than alternative therapy) was 85%.
These findings suggest that ceftriaxone can be used to effectively treat bloodstream infections with E. coli or K. pneumoniae that are non-susceptible to piperacillin/tazobactam but susceptible to ceftriaxone.
一小部分大肠杆菌和肺炎克雷伯菌在体外对哌拉西林/他唑巴坦表现出非敏感性,但对头孢曲松保持敏感性。对于如何最好地治疗这些分离株,仍存在不确定性。
我们旨在比较哌拉西林/他唑巴坦不敏感但头孢曲松敏感的大肠埃希菌或肺炎克雷伯菌血流感染患者接受头孢曲松或其他有效抗生素作为明确治疗的临床结局。
我们回顾性地确定了 2013 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 12 月 31 日期间,对哌拉西林/他唑巴坦不敏感但头孢曲松敏感的大肠埃希菌或肺炎克雷伯菌进行了阳性血培养的患者。患者分为两组中的一组作为明确治疗:头孢曲松或其他有效抗生素。我们的主要结局是 90 天全因死亡率、住院再入院或感染复发的复合结局。我们使用 Cox 比例风险模型比较两组之间的复合结局时间。
我们的分析纳入了 62 名患者。总体而言,中位年龄为 63 岁(IQR 49.5-71.0),最常见的感染源是腹腔内(25/62;40.3%),治疗的总持续时间中位数为 12.0 天(IQR 9.0-16.8)。头孢曲松治疗组有 9/22(40.9%)名患者和其他有效抗生素组有 18/40(45.0%)名患者符合复合终点。在调整后的时间事件分析中,两组之间复合终点无差异(HR 0.67,95%CI 0.30-1.50)。调整后的贝叶斯后验概率表明,HR 小于或等于 1(即头孢曲松与其他治疗一样或更好)的概率为 85%。
这些发现表明,头孢曲松可有效治疗对哌拉西林/他唑巴坦不敏感但对头孢曲松敏感的大肠埃希菌或肺炎克雷伯菌血流感染。