The Annals of pharmacotherapy · 2024
Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Loudermilk Carly, Eudy Joshua, Albrecht Stephanie, Slaton Cara N, Stramel Stefanie, Tu Patrick, Albrecht Benjamin, Green Sarah B, Bouchard Jeannette L, Orvin Alison I, Caveness Christian F, Newsome Andrea Sikora, Bland Christopher M, Anderson Daniel T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Intravenous (IV) antibiotics have historically been considered standard of care for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs). Recent literature has shown sequential oral (PO) therapy to be noninferior to IV antibiotics for certain pathogens and disease states. However, a gap exists in the literature for BSI caused by Enterococcus faecalis.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of definitive sequential PO therapy to definitive IV therapy in patients with E faecalis BSI.
METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study of adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for E faecalis from January 2017 to November 2022. Patients with polymicrobial BSI, concomitant infections requiring prolonged IV antibiotic therapy, those who did not receive antibiotic therapy, and those who died within 72 hours of index culture were excluded. Subjects were matched based on source of infection in a 2:1 (IV:PO) ratio. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic duration, and 30-day readmission rate.
RESULTS: Of the 186 patients who met criteria for inclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome for PO compared to IV therapy (14.5% vs 21.8%; OR 0.53 [0.23-1.25]) or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 29%; OR 0.53 [0.25-1.13]). Hospital LOS was significantly longer in patients receiving IV-only therapy (6 days vs 14 days; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Sequential oral therapy for E faecalis BSI had similar outcomes compared to IV-only treatment and may be considered in eligible patients.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of definitive sequential PO therapy to definitive IV therapy in patients with E faecalis BSI.
METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study of adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for E faecalis from January 2017 to November 2022. Patients with polymicrobial BSI, concomitant infections requiring prolonged IV antibiotic therapy, those who did not receive antibiotic therapy, and those who died within 72 hours of index culture were excluded. Subjects were matched based on source of infection in a 2:1 (IV:PO) ratio. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic duration, and 30-day readmission rate.
RESULTS: Of the 186 patients who met criteria for inclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome for PO compared to IV therapy (14.5% vs 21.8%; OR 0.53 [0.23-1.25]) or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 29%; OR 0.53 [0.25-1.13]). Hospital LOS was significantly longer in patients receiving IV-only therapy (6 days vs 14 days; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Sequential oral therapy for E faecalis BSI had similar outcomes compared to IV-only treatment and may be considered in eligible patients.