Comparative effectiveness of empirical antibiotic treatments in methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis: A post hoc analysis of a prospective French cohort study.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The empirical treatment of infective endocarditis is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of empirical treatment with antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP) or cefazolin vs. other treatments in methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) endocarditis. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of a prospective cohort study of patients hospitalized in a French reference centre with MSSA endocarditis was conducted between 2013 and 2022. The primary outcome was the duration of bacteraemia under treatment. RESULTS: Of the 208 patients included, 101 patients (48.6%) were classified in the reference group (ASP or cefazolin) and 107 (52.4%) in the non-reference group. Empirical treatment with ASP/cefazolin was associated with a shorter duration of bacteraemia compared to other treatments (3.6 d vs. 4.6 d, P = 0.01). This difference was not corrected by the addition of an aminoglycoside (3.6 d vs. 4.7 d, P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, empirical treatment with ASP/cefazolin was associated with a duration of bacteraemia ≤72 h (P = 0.02), whereas endocarditis on native valves (P = 0.01), and intracardiac abscess were associated with longer duration of bacteraemia (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Empirical treatment of endocarditis with ASP or Cefazolin is more effective than other treatments in MSSA endocarditis, even when the other treatments are combined with aminoglycosides.