Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Teicoplanin and vancomycin as treatment for glycopeptide-susceptible Enterococcus faecium bacteraemia: a propensity score-adjusted non-inferior comparative study.
Yamaguchi, Ryo; Yamamoto, Takehito; Okamoto, Koh; Harada, Sohei; Echizenya, Miho; Tsutsumi, Takeya; Takada, Tappei.
Afiliação
  • Yamaguchi R; Department of Pharmacy, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Yamamoto T; Department of Pharmacy, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Okamoto K; The Education Center for Clinical Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Harada S; Department of Infectious Diseases, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Echizenya M; Department of Infection Control and Prevention, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Tsutsumi T; Department of Pharmacy, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Takada T; Department of Infectious Diseases, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
J Antimicrob Chemother ; 78(5): 1231-1240, 2023 05 03.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36918748
OBJECTIVES: Limited evidence is available regarding alternative therapeutic agents to vancomycin in treating glycopeptide-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (GSEF) bacteraemia. This study assessed the effectiveness and safety of teicoplanin compared with vancomycin for treating GSEF bacteraemia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, non-inferiority cohort study. Patients aged ≥18 years who developed GSEF bacteraemia and received either teicoplanin or vancomycin were included. The primary effectiveness outcome was the clinical success at the end of treatment, with a generalized linear model using the propensity score for selecting the agent as a covariate. We used an absolute difference of 20% in clinical success as the non-inferiority margin. Using multivariable logistic regression, the primary safety outcome was the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI). RESULTS: In total, 164 patients (74 and 90 in the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively) were included. Overall, 64.9% (48/74) and 48.9% (44/90) of patients in the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively, achieved the primary effectiveness outcome. A generalized linear analysis showed an adjusted effectiveness difference of 9.9% (95% CI, -0.9% to 20.0%; P = 0.07), indicating non-inferiority of teicoplanin versus vancomycin. The incidence of AKI was 8.1% (6/74) and 24.4% (22/90) in the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively, with an adjusted OR of 0.242 (95% CI, 0.068 to 0.864; P = 0.029), indicating significantly lower AKI risk in the teicoplanin than in the vancomycin group. CONCLUSIONS: Teicoplanin is a safe and useful alternative therapeutic agent for treating GSEF bacteraemia.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Enterococcus faecium / Bacteriemia / Injúria Renal Aguda Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Enterococcus faecium / Bacteriemia / Injúria Renal Aguda Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article