Development and internal validation of a model for predicting cefoperazone/sulbactam-associated coagulation disorders in Chinese inpatients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The use of cefoperazone/sulbactam (CPZ/SAM) could commonly cause vitamin K-dependent coagulation disorders and even hemorrhage sometimes. However, there is a lack of prediction tools estimating the risk for this. This study aimed at developing and internally validating a model for predicting CPZ/SAM-associated coagulation disorders in Chinese inpatients. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted in 11,092 adult inpatients admitted to a Chinese general hospital between 2020 and 2021 and treated with CPZ/SAM. Patients with CPZ/SAM-associated coagulation disorders were identified through the Adverse Drug Events Active Surveillance and Assessment System-II and subsequent manual evaluation. Controls were selected from eligible patients who didn't develop coagulation disorders after CPZ/SAM therapy, with a 1:1 propensity score matching. The final predictors were obtained by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Internal validation and calibration for the model were performed using 1000 bootstrap resamplings. RESULTS: 258 patients were identified as CPZ/SAM-associated coagulation disorders in 2184 patients eligible for inclusions and exclusions and the incidence was 11.8%. A final population of 252 cases and 252 controls was included for model development and validation. Malnutrition (OR = 2.41 (1.56-3.77)), history of recent bleeding (OR = 1.95 (1.32-2.90)), treatment duration (OR = 1.10 (1.07-1.14)), combination with carbapenems (OR = 4.43 (1.85-11.88)), and serum creatinine (OR = 1.01 (1.00-1.01)) were identified as final predictors. The model showed good discrimination, calibration, and clinical practicality, with the validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve being 0.723 (0.683-0.770). CONCLUSIONS: The model with good performance quantifies the risk for CPZ/SAM-associated coagulation disorders, and may support individual assessment and interventions to mitigate the risk after external validation.

A Rare Cause of Coagulopathy in the Emergency Department: Cefoperazone Use.

Cefoperazone (CPZ) is an antibiotic widely used for moderate to severe infections, especially in countries where resources are difficult to access. This case report aimed to draw attention to coagulopathy, a potential side effect of CPZ. This side effect can cause high mortality and morbidity in patients. In the mechanism of CPZ causing coagulopathy, it is reported that effects such as binding to vitamin K, disrupting vitamin K metabolism, and preventing platelet aggregation are responsible. In this presentation, a case who came to the emergency department with the complaint of hematuria caused by coagulopathy after the use of CPZ-containing antibiotics (CPZ + sulbactam) is presented.

Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia in Hospitalized adult patients.

Cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia is associated with longer hospital stays and increased risk of death. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a nomogram for predicting the occurrence of cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia in hospitalized adult patients. This retrospective cohort study involved hospitalized adult patients at Xi'an Central Hospital from January 2020 to December 2022 based on the Chinese pharmacovigilance system developed and established by the Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Center in China. Independent predictors of cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia were obtained using multivariate logistic regression and were used to develop and establish the nomogram. According to the same standard, the clinical data of hospitalized patients using cefoperazone/sulbactam at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Medical University from January 1, 2023 to June 30, 2023 were collected as the external validation group. The 893 hospitalized patients included 95 who were diagnosed with cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia. Our study enrolled 610 patients: 427 in the training group and 183 in the internal validation group. The independent predictors of cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia were surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 5.279, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.597-10.729), baseline platelet count ≤50×109/L (OR = 2.492, 95% CI = 1.110-5.593), baseline hepatic dysfunction (OR = 12.362, 95% CI = 3.277-46.635), cumulative defined daily doses (OR = 1.162, 95% CI = 1.162-1.221) and nutritional risk (OR = 16.973, 95% CI = 7.339-39.254). The areas under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic for the training and internal validation groups were 0.909 (95% CI = 0.875-0.943) and 0.888 (95% CI = 0.832-0.944), respectively. The Hosmer-Lemeshow tests yielded p = 0.475 and p = 0.742 for the training and internal validation groups, respectively, confirming the goodness of fit of the nomogram model. In the external validation group (n = 221), the nomogram was equally robust in cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia (AUC = 0.837, 95%CI = 0.736-0.938). The nomogram model constructed in this study had good predictive performance and extrapolation, which can help clinicians to identify patients at high risk of cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia early. This will be useful in preventing the occurrence of cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hypoprothrombinaemia and allowing timely intervention measures to be performed.

Safety of Tigecycline in Patients on Antithrombotic Therapy: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aims of the study were to investigate the risk factors of tigecycline-induced hypofibrinogenemia and to evaluate the safety of tigecycline with concomitant antithrombotic drugs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who received tigecycline for more than 3 days between January 2015 and June 2019. Clinical and laboratory data were collected including fibrinogen concertation, tigecycline dose, duration of treatment, disease severity, complete blood count, indicators of infection, liver and renal function. Risk factors of hypofibrinogenemia were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. To evaluate the safety of tigecycline and concomitant antithrombotic drugs, bleeding events were assessed by comparing the decline in hemoglobin and the amount of red blood cell transfusion in patients with antithrombotic drugs and those without. RESULTS: This study included a total of 68 cases, 20 of which experienced hypofibrinogenemia while receiving tigecycline treatment. Duration of treatment, cefoperazone/sulbactam combination therapy, and fibrinogen levels prior to initiation of tigecycline were risk factors associated with tigecycline-induced hypofibrinogenemia. There were 26 recorded bleeding incidents, 25 of which happened before the start of tigecycline. Antithrombotic and non-antithrombotic patients did not differ in their hemoglobin decline or need for red blood cell transfusions while taking tigecycline. CONCLUSION: A longer treatment duration, cefoperazone/sulbactam combination therapy, and a lower level of fibrinogen before tigecycline were associated with an increased risk of tigecycline-induced hypofibrinogenemia. A combination of antithrombotic drugs and tigecycline did not aggravate the bleeding events during tigecycline treatment.

Effect of Cefoperazone/Sulbactam on Blood Coagulation Function in Infected Emergency Department Patients and the Necessity of Vitamin K1 (VK1) Preventive Intervention: A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND Owing to its broad-spectrum antibacterial activity, strong antibacterial effects, and ß-lactamase stability, cefoperazone/sulbactam has been recognized as a first-line empirical drug for treating severe infections. However, its administration is also characterized by numerous adverse effects, including coagulation dysfunction. Here, we summarize past clinical treatment data to provide data support for clinical use of cefoperazone sulbactam. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed the clinical medical records of 820 patients treated with cefoperazone/sulbactam from January 2015 to December 2020. A retrospective cohort study design was used. We assessed the general data of patients, age and sex distribution, type of primary disease, and incidence and days of abnormal blood coagulation with cefoperazone sulbactam. The chi-square test and t test were used to analyze the effect of cefoperazone sulbactam on coagulation function and the effect of vitamin K intervention on prognosis. RESULTS The rate of coagulation dysfunction was 24.39% (200 patients). Among these 200 patients, 50 were treated with vitamin K1. With increasing patient age, the number of patients with cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced coagulation dysfunction increased (peak at 81-90 years). APACHE II of coagulation dysfunction (15.54±4.095) was significantly higher than that in the normal group. It occurred at days 2-19 after administration of 9.0 g/day of cefoperazone/sulbactam. Measured coagulation indices were significantly higher after treatment with cefoperazone/sulbactam than before treatment, including international normalized ratio, prothrombin time, and activated partial thrombin time (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS All coagulation indices decreased significantly after vitamin K1 intervention, indicating improved coagulation function, especially in patients with high APACHE II scores. Hence, regulated vitamin K1 administration can benefit patients with coagulation dysfunction in clinical treatment.

Risk evaluation of ampicillin/sulbactam-induced liver injury based on albumin-bilirubin score.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is an adverse reaction caused by ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT). The albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score is an index of hepatic functional reserve. However, the relationship between ABPC/SBT-induced DILI and ALBI score remains unknown; therefore, we aimed to elucidate the risk of ABPC/SBT-induced DILI based on the ALBI score. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, case-control study using electronic medical records. A total of 380 patients were enrolled in the present study, and the primary outcome was ABPC/SBT-induced DILI. The ALBI score was calculated using serum albumin and total bilirubin levels. In addition, we performed COX regression analysis using age ≥75 years, dose ≥9 g/day, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥21 IU/L, and ALBI score ≥-2.00 as covariates. We also performed 1:1 propensity score matching between non-DILI and DILI groups. RESULTS: The incidence of DILI was 9.5% (36/380). According to COX regression analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio for ABPC/SBT-induced DILI with an ALBI score ≥-2.00 was 2.55 (95% confidence interval: 1.256-5.191, P = 0.010), suggesting that patients with baseline ALBI score ≥-2.00 may be at high risk for ABPC/SBT-induced DILI. However, significant differences were not observed in cumulative risk for DILI between non-DILI and DILI patients regarding an ALBI score ≥-2.00 after propensity score matching (P = 0.146). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that ALBI score may be a simple and potentially useful index for predicting ABPC/SBT-induced DILI. In patients with an ALBI score ≥-2.00, frequent liver function monitoring should be considered to prevent ABPC/SBT-induced DILI.

Cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced hemolytic anemia.

Drug-induced hemolytic anemia (DIHA) is a rare complication of drug therapy and usually underdiagnosed. Cefoperazone/sulbactam is a compound prepared from the third generation of cephalosporin and ß-lactamase inhibitor. There are limited data of DIHA induced from cefoperazone/sulbactam. A 93-year-old female patient, who had an operation on the biliary tract 3 months ago, was admitted to our hospital with an abdominal infection. After cefoperazone/sulbactam was given as anti-infection treatment, the patient developed hemolytic anemia on the third day. Cefoperazone/sulbactam was discontinued and replaced with meropenem. Subsequently the level of red blood cells, hemoglobin, and hematocrit returned to normal. Clinicians should pay attention to monitoring the possible adverse reactions during the use of cefoperazone/sulbactam and should be aware of the occurrence of DIHA, so as to give timely treatment.

Evaluation of First-Dose, Intravenous Push Penicillins and Carbapenems in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Early appropriate antibiotic administration is associated with improved outcomes in infectious illnesses. During drug shortages in 2017, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists recommended intravenous push (IVP) administration of medications when possible to conserve small-volume parenteral solutions. Data supporting IVP penicillins and carbapenems was limited. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study compared time from patient emergency department (ED) arrival to antibiotic administration between IVP and intravenous piggy-back (IVPB) administration. METHODS: This single-center pre-post protocol study assessed changes in administration timing and safety of ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ertapenem from 2015-2018. Medication administration by IVPB (pre) or IVP (post), ED arrival, antibiotic order and administration times, potential effectors of administration time, and safety events were assessed. Acquisition costs were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 696 administrations were included, with 351 and 345 subjects in the IVPB and IVP cohorts, respectively. The median time from ED arrival to initiation of antibiotic administration was 140 (IQR 87-221) minutes and 110 (IQR 68-181) minutes in the IVPB and IVP cohorts, respectively, (P < 0.01). IVP administration increased the proportion of indexed antibiotics administered within 60 minutes of ED arrival compared to IVPB (20% vs. 12%, respectively, P < 0.01). There was no difference in adverse events between both cohorts. Supply acquisition cost savings totaled an more than $5,000 with the IVP protocol. CONCLUSION: IVP administration of ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ertapenem improved times to initiation of empiric, first-dose antibiotics in the ED without an increase in adverse events, saving over $5,000 annually.

Comparison of antibiotic-associated diarrhea caused by cefoperazone/sulbactam or piperacillin/tazobactam in neurosurgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the occurrence and prognosis of antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) between patients treated with cefoperazone/sulbactam and piperacillin/tazobactam in the neurosurgery department. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed patients who received cefoperazone/sulbactam or piperacillin/tazobactam to prevent or treat hospital-acquired infections in the Department of Neurosurgery of The First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital between October 2019 and October 2020. For patients with AAD, clinical data, antibiotic usage, the incidence of diarrhea, treatment, and prognosis were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 356 patients were enrolled, and 65 (18.6%) experienced AAD, 38 patients in the cefoperazone/sulbactam group and 27 patients in the piperacillin/tazobactam group. The AAD rate did not differ between the treatment arms. Conversely, the dosage, intensity, and duration of antibiotic therapy differed between the groups, whereas no differences were noted in the time to the appearance of diarrhea and prognosis. According to regression analysis, the incidence of AAD did not differ between the groups (odds ratio [OR] = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.46-1.48). CONCLUSION: Cefoperazone/sulbactam or piperacillin/tazobactam can lead to a similar incidence rate of AAD. The combined application of antibiotics and empiric therapy often occurs. The rational use of antibiotics should be improved.

Effects of dosing frequency on the clinical efficacy of ampicillin/sulbactam in Japanese elderly patients with pneumonia: A single-center retrospective observational study.

This study sought to investigate whether dosing frequency (the number of doses per day) affects the antimicrobial efficacy and safety of ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) in Japanese elderly pneumonia patients treated with ABPC/SBT at 6 g/day. This was a retrospective observational study that included hospitalized elderly patients (aged ≥75 years, 10 ml/min ≤CLcr <50 ml/min) who received 3 g every 12 h (BID; n = 61) or 1.5 g every 6 h (QID; n = 45) for the treatment of pneumonia. The primary endpoint was clinical response, assessed by measuring body temperature, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein levels. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic simulations were conducted in silico to rationalize the clinical findings. The clinical response rates (extremely effective and effective) in the BID and QID groups were 36.1% and 55.6%, respectively (p = .0459). QID tended to be more effective in patients with gram-negative rods detected (p = .0563). According to the simulated minimum plasma ABPC concentrations at steady state for BID and QID were 2.5 and 7.3 µg/ml, respectively (p < .0001). Based on the simulated time above minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), pharmacological (not clinical) efficacy was predicted to be higher with QID. Both groups had similar safety profiles. The main adverse event in both groups was liver damage. The present retrospective survey demonstrated that ABPC/SBT treatment for elderly patients with pneumonia and renal dysfunction was more effective with QID than with BID. Therefore, the QID regimen is worthy of consideration to improve the clinical outcomes of ABPC/SBT therapy in the present patient population.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Cefoperazone-Sulbactam in Treatment of Intra-Abdominal Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam against alternative antibiotics in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, and CKNI databases were searched for relevant articles up to November 25, 2020. The primary outcome was clinical efficacy rate, and the secondary outcomes were microbiologic eradication rate, mortality rate, and adverse event (AE) risk. Results: Twelve studies involving 1,674 patients were included. Overall, the clinical efficacy rate of cefoperazone-sulbactam and comparators was 87.7% and 81.7%, respectively, and cefoperazone-sulbactam was associated with a higher clinical efficacy rate than that the comparator (odds ratio [OR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-3.00; I2 = 36%). Additionally, cefoperazone-sulbactam was associated with a lower clinical failure rate (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.28-0.57; I2 = 0) and a higher clinical cure rate (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.17-2.03; I2 = 0) than the comparators. Cefoperazone-sulbactam was associated with a higher microbiologic eradication rate than the comparator (OR 2.54; 95% CI 1.72-3.76; I2 = 0). Finally, there was no significant difference between cefoperazone-sulbactam and the comparators in terms of mortality rate (OR 090; 95% CI 0.38-2.16; I2 = 0) and AE risk (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.74-1.55; I2 = 0). Conclusions: The clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam were similar to those of alternative antibiotics in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Therefore, cefoperazone-sulbactam could be recommended as an effective and safe antibiotic for treating intra-abdominal infections.

Comparative efficacy and safety of combination therapy with high-dose sulbactam or colistin with additional antibacterial agents for multiple drug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with high-dose sulbactam or colistin with additional antibacterial agents for treating multidrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDR-AB or XDR-AB) infections. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science (through March 30, 2020) for studies that examined high-dose sulbactam or colistin with additional antibacterial agents as therapy for patients with infections with MDR-AB and XDR-AB. Through a network meta-analysis (NMA), using both direct and indirect evidence, we determined risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Primary outcomes included clinical improvement, clinical cure, microbiological eradication, and mortality from any cause. Secondary outcomes included nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: The NMA included 18 studies and 1835 patients. We found that high-dose sulbactam (≥6 g per day), combined with another single antibacterial agent (levofloxacin or tigecycline), which were the highest ranking in clinical improvement and clinical cure. Still colistin-based combination in drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii therapy occupied the main position (the number of studies and patients) in most studies. Colistin combined with additional antibacterial agents was associated with a higher risk of nephrotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic regimens including high-dose sulbactam in combination with additional antibacterial agents (including colistin) might be one of the promising options for the treatment of MDR-AB or XDR-AB infections and high-quality study will be needed to confirm clinical efficacy.

Case Report: First Case of Cefotaxime-Sulbactam-Induced Acute Intravascular Hemolysis in a Newborn With ABO Blood Type Incompatibility by the Mechanism of Non-Immunologic Protein Adsorption.

Background: ABO blood type incompatibility hemolytic disease of newborn (ABO-HDN) and drug-induced immune hemolytic anemia (DIIHA) due to non-immunologic protein adsorption (NIPA) mainly cause extravascular hemolysis. All the reported severe DIIHA were caused by drug-induced antibodies, and rare report of acute intravascular hemolysis was caused by the NIPA mechanism or ABO-HDN. Case presentation: We report the first case of acute intravascular hemolysis induced by cefotaxime sodium - sulbactam sodium (CTX - SBT) in a case of ABO-HDN which resulted in death at 55 h after birth. The mother's blood type was O and RhD-positive, and the newborn's blood type was B and RhD-positive. No irregular red blood cell (RBC) antibodies or drug-dependent antibodies related to CTX or SBT was detected in the mother's plasma and the plasma or the RBC acid eluent of the newborn. Before the newborn received CTX - SBT treatment, the result of direct antiglobulin test (DAT) was negative while anti-B was positive (2 +) in both plasma and acid eluent. After the newborn received CTX - SBT treatment, the results of DAT for anti-IgG and anti-C3d were both positive, while anti-B was not detected in plasma, but stronger anti-B (3 +) was detected in acid eluent. In vitro experiments confirmed that NIPA of SBT promoted the specific binding of maternal-derived IgG anti-B to B antigen on RBCs of the newborn, thereby inducing acute intravascular hemolysis. Conclusion: The NIPA effect of SBT promoted the specific binding of mother-derived IgG anti-B in newborn's plasma to the newborn's RBC B antigens and formed an immune complex, and then activated complement, which led to acute intravascular hemolysis. Drugs such as SBT with NIPA effect should not be used for newborns with HDN.

A case report of rash induced by cefoperazone sodium and sulbactam sodium plus metronidazole sodium chloride combined with morphine hydrochloride.

We report a case of rashes in a patient undergoing cesarean section. She was administered cefoperazone and sulbactam sodium + metronidazole sodium chloride combined with morphine hydrochloride perioperatively, which caused a rash as an adverse side effect. The patient, 35 years old, underwent lower uterine segment cesarean section under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. She received intravenous infusion of cefoperazone sodium and sulbactam sodium + metronidazole sodium chloride for anti-infection therapy before operation and morphine hydrochloride for analgesia at the end of the operation. The patient later experienced skin itching and had rashes on the waist, abdomen, and back. According to the patient's physical signs, the correlation with drug injection time, and the adverse side effects reported in the drug instructions and related literature, the adverse side effect may have been caused by cefoperazone sodium and sulbactam sodium, metronidazole sodium chloride, and morphine hydrochloride. The drugs were suspended, and the patient was given anti-allergic treatment. After that, the above symptoms subsided. Therefore, we suspect that cefoperazone sodium and sulbactam sodium, metronidazole sodium chloride, or morphine hydrochloride injection, or a combination of two or more of these drugs, caused the adverse side effect of skin rash in the patient. This study reports a case of adverse side effects of skin itching and rash after the use of cefoperazone sodium and sulbactam sodium, metronidazole sodium chloride, and morphine hydrochloride in a pregnant woman undergoing cesarean section. The occurrence of adverse side effects in special populations should attract clinicians' attention. When giving such drugs, medical personnel should take a full history the patient's allergy and closely monitor the occurrence of adverse side effects in the early stages of medication.

Comparison of safety between high and low doses of sulbactam/ampicillin: A retrospective observational study in Japanese patients with pneumonia.

Although 12 g/day sulbactam/ampicillin (SBT/ABPC) is approved in Japan, differences in the frequency of adverse effects induced by conventional (≤6 g/day) and high (≥9 g/day) doses remain unclear. We performed a retrospective observational study on SBT/ABPC-treated hospitalized adult patients with pneumonia from October 2015 to January 2018 to compare the safety between high and low doses. Patients were divided into high-dose (≥9 g/day, n = 200) and low-dose (≤6 g/day, n = 246) groups. We used logistic regression to determine propensity scores for the high-dose and low-dose groups and compared the incidence of adverse effects after propensity score adjustment (n = 200 in each group). Following propensity score adjustment, the frequency of elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level was still significantly higher in the high-dose group than in the low-dose group (21% versus 11%, p = 0.006). In contrast, the frequencies of elevated alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, and serum creatinine levels and decreased white blood cell and platelet counts, and incidence of anemia, were not. Changes in blood urea nitrogen levels, erythrocyte count, and hematocrit were not significantly different between the two dose groups. There were two cases of rash reported to the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency as an adverse effect in the high-dose group. Thirty-day mortality rates were not significantly different after propensity score adjustment. Our analysis suggests that an increase in the ALT grade was more frequent in patients treated with a daily dose of SBT/ABPC of ≥9 g.

The effect of cefoperazone sulbactam and piperacillin tazobactam on mortality in Gram-negative nosocomial infections.

Cefoperazone-sulbactam (CS) and piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP) are used in the treatment of Gram-negative nosocomial infections (NIs). We aimed to compare the effects of these two antibiotics on mortality and treatment success. Patients treated with CS or TZP empirically for at least three days with suspicion of NI were included in this retrospective study. In total, 308 (154 patients in both treatment arms) patients were analyzed. Treatment success rate in CS and TZP group respectively (50% vs 51.2%, p = 0.18), 28-day mortality rate (46.1% vs 42.8%, p = 0.56) and antibiotic-related side effects (50.6% vs 46.1%, p = 0.42) were similar except prolonged prothrombin time (19.4% vs 6.4%; p = 0.001). According to this study results, CS and TZP have equal effectivity and safety for the empirical treatment of Gram-negative NIs. CS may be an appropriate alternative to TZP for antibiotic cycling or mixing strategy to reduce antibiotic resistance.

Cefoperazone-sulbactam and risk of coagulation disorders or bleeding: a retrospective cohort study.

Objectives: Limited evidence has suggested that cefoperazone-sulbactam causes coagulation disorders and bleeding.Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective study to compare patients receiving cefoperazone-sulbactam versus those treated with cefoperazone-tazobactam or ceftazidime. Propensity-score matching was used to explore whether treatment with cefoperazone-sulbactam increased the risk of prothrombin time (PT) prolongation, coagulation disorders, and bleeding, or decreased platelets (PLT).Results: The cohort included 23,242 patients. Among patients receiving cefoperazone-sulbactam, the risk of PT prolongation, coagulation disorders, decreased PLT, and bleeding was 5.3%, 9.2%, 15.7%, and 4.2%, respectively. Propensity-score matching analyses suggested that cefoperazone-sulbactam increased the risk of PT prolongation (aOR 2.26, 95% CI 1.61-3.18), coagulation disorders (aOR 1.81, 95% CI 1.43-2.30), and decreased PLT (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.25-1.72), but not increase bleeding (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.40) compared with ceftazidime. Patients receiving cefoperazone-sulbactam had higher risk of PT prolongation (aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.11-2.10), coagulation disorders (aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.21-1.95), but not decreased PLT (aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81-1.07) or bleeding (aOR 1.11, 95% CI 0.87-1.42), compared with those receiving cefoperazone-tazobactam.Conclusion: Cefoperazone-sulbactam may be associated with a higher risk of PT prolongation and coagulation disorders compared with cefoperazone-tazobactam and ceftazidime.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Intravenous Durlobactam and Sulbactam in Subjects with Renal Impairment and Healthy Matched Control Subjects.

Sulbactam-durlobactam is being developed for the treatment of infections caused by Acinetobacter baumannii, including those caused by multidrug- and carbapenem-resistant isolates. This was a phase 1 study to evaluate the effects of various degrees of renal impairment, including subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis (HD), on the pharmacokinetics and safety profile of durlobactam (also known as ETX2514) and sulbactam after single intravenous (i.v.) dose administration. For healthy subjects and those with mild or moderate renal impairment (RI), single 1,000-mg doses each of durlobactam and sulbactam via a 3-h i.v. infusion were administered, and for severe renal impairment, 500-mg doses were administered. For subjects with ESRD and HD, 500-mg i.v. doses each of durlobactam and sulbactam were administered post-HD and pre-HD, with a 1-week washout between doses. Among 34 subjects, decreasing renal function increased systemic exposure (peak plasma concentration [Cmax] and area under the concentration-time curve [AUC]) to durlobactam and sulbactam in a generally linear manner. In healthy subjects and in those with mild or moderate renal impairment, the majority of durlobactam and sulbactam was excreted in the urine, while approximately 40% or less was excreted in urine in subjects with severe renal impairment or ESRD. In subjects with ESRD, hemodialysis was effective at removing both durlobactam and sulbactam from plasma. Renal impairment had no effect of the safety/tolerability profile of durlobactam and sulbactam. In summary, RI and ESRD had a predictable effect on the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of durlobactam and sulbactam with no adverse effects on the safety/tolerability profile. Durlobactam and sulbactam are cleared to a similar extent by renal elimination and are impacted similarly by renal impairment. The results from this study have been used with population PK modeling and nonclinically derived PK/PD (pharmacodynamic) exposure targets to establish dosage recommendations for durlobactam and sulbactam in patients with various degrees of RI. The dosing regimen of durlobactam-sulbactam will require adjustment in patients with severe renal insufficiency and in those with ESRD.