Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Ha, Soyoung
• Huh, Kyungmin
• Chung, Doo Ryeon
• Ko, Jae-Hoon
• Cho, Sun Young
• Huh, Hee Jae
• Lee, Nam Yong
• Kang, Cheol-In
• Peck, Kyong Ran
• Song, Jae-Hoon

Titel

Efficacy of teicoplanin in bloodstream infections caused by Enterococcus faecium: posthoc analysis of a nationwide surveillance

Ist Teil von

• International journal of infectious diseases, 2022-09, Vol.122, p.506-513

Ort / Verlag

Elsevier Ltd

Erscheinungsjahr

2022

Quelle

EZB Electronic Journals Library

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• •There are limited data on teicoplanin as a treatment for Enterococcus faecium bacteremia.•Teicoplanin and vancomycin were compared in a multicenter surveillance.•There was no significant difference in 30-day in-hospital mortality.•Our findings suggest teicoplanin as a useful alternative to vancomycin. Vancomycin and teicoplanin are glycopeptides with activity against Enterococcus faecium. However, studies on the clinical efficacy of teicoplanin are limited. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of teicoplanin and vancomycin in E. faecium bacteremia. We identified patients with bloodstream infections prospectively from July 2015 to December 2016 in 14 hospitals as part of a multicenter nationwide surveillance. Patients with E. faecium monomicrobial bacteremia were selected. Teicoplanin and vancomycin groups included patients treated with either agent for ≥48 hours. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause in-hospital mortality. The Cox proportional hazards model with inverse probability weighting was used to account for the imbalance in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Among 97 patients with E. faecium bacteremia, 33 (34%) were treated with teicoplanin and 64 (66%) with vancomycin. There were no significant differences in 30-day in-hospital mortality (18.2% vs 26.6%, P = 0.358) and 7-day mortality (6.1% vs 15.6%, P = 0.212). Furthermore, multivariable analysis confirmed that the use of teicoplanin was not significantly associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-1.86; P = 0.494). We found no significant differences in the clinical outcomes. These findings suggest teicoplanin as a useful alternative to vancomycin.