Search

Introduction Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia is a frequent condition, with high mortality rates. There is a growing interest in identifying new therapeutic regimens able to reduce therapeutic failure and mortality observed with the standard of care of beta-lactam monotherapy. In vitro and small-scale studies have found synergy between cloxacillin and fosfomycin against S. aureus. Our aim is to test the hypothesis that cloxacillin plus fosfomycin achieves higher treatment success than cloxacillin alone in patients with MSSA bacteraemia.Methods We will perform a superiority, randomised, open-label, phase IV–III, two-armed parallel group (1:1) clinical trial at 20 Spanish tertiary hospitals. Adults (≥18 years) with isolation of MSSA from at least one blood culture ≤72 hours before inclusion with evidence of infection, will be randomly allocated to receive either cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous plus fosfomycin 3 g/6-hour intravenous or cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous alone for 7 days. After the first week, sequential treatment and total duration of antibiotic therapy will be determined according to clinical criteria by the attending physician.Primary endpoints: (1) Treatment success at day 7, a composite endpoint comprising all the following criteria: patient alive, stable or with improved quick-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, afebrile and with negative blood cultures for MSSA at day 7. (2) Treatment success at test of cure (TOC) visit: patient alive and no isolation of MSSA in blood culture or at another sterile site from day 8 until TOC (12 weeks after randomisation).We assume a rate of treatment success of 74% in the cloxacillin group. Accepting alpha risk of 0.05 and beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 183 subjects will be required in each of the control and experimental groups to obtain statistically significant difference of 12% (considered clinically significant).Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been obtained from the Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital (AC069/18) and from the Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Product Regulatory Agency (AEMPS, AC069/18), and is valid for all participating centres under existing Spanish legislation. The results will be presented at international meetings and will be made available to patients and funders.Trial registration number The protocol has been approved by AEMPS with the Trial Registration Number EudraCT 2018-001207-37. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959345; Pre-results.

Abstract Background Klebsiella aerogenes has been reclassified from Enterobacter to Klebsiella genus due to its phenotypic and genotypic similarities with Klebsiella pneumoniae. It is unclear if clinical outcomes are also more similar. This study aims to assess clinical outcomes of bloodstreams infections (BSI) caused by K. aerogenes, K. pneumoniae and Enterobacter cloacae, through secondary data analysis, nested in PRO-BAC cohort study. Methods Hospitalized patients between October 2016 and March 2017 with monomicrobial BSI due to K. aerogenes, K. pneumoniae or E. cloacae were included. Primary outcome was a composite clinical outcome including all-cause mortality or recurrence until 30 days follow-up. Secondary outcomes were fever ≥ 72 h, persistent bacteraemia, and secondary device infection. Multilevel mixed-effect Poisson regression was used to estimate the association between microorganisms and outcome. Results Overall, 29 K. aerogenes, 77 E. cloacae and 337 K. pneumoniae BSI episodes were included. Mortality or recurrence was less frequent in K. aerogenes (6.9%) than in E. cloacae (20.8%) or K. pneumoniae (19.0%), but statistical difference was not observed (rate ratio (RR) 0.35, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.55; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.71, respectively). Fever ≥ 72 h and device infection were more common in K. aerogenes group. In the multivariate analysis, adjusted for confounders (age, sex, BSI source, hospital ward, Charlson score and active antibiotic therapy), the estimates and direction of effect were similar to crude results. Conclusions Results suggest that BSI caused by K. aerogenes may have a better prognosis than E. cloacae or K. pneumoniae BSI.

Objectives: Due to its long half-life, dalbavancin offers benefits for long-duration treatments, especially osteoarticular and infective endocarditis (IE). We evaluated the efficacy and costs of IE treatment, comparing dalbavancin with standard of care (SOC). Methods: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of adult patients with Gram-positive cocci definite IE. Dalbavancin was used as a sequential therapy before discharge. Efficacy was a combined variable of clinical cure and absence of recurrence in 12-month follow-up. Length of hospital stay and the associated costs were analyzed in both groups of treatment. Results: Twenty-two patients received dalbavancin and 47 SOC. The efficacy was similar between the groups (dalbavancin 18 [72%] vs SOC 44 [94%], P = 0.198). Hospital stay was shorter in the dalbavancin group (dalbavancin 22 days [16-34] vs SOC 37 days [23-49], P = 0.001), especially in those with E. faecalis IE (dalbavancin 30 days [20-36] vs SOC 65 days [46-74], P

Abstract Introduction Ceftazidime–avibactam has proven activity against multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria in clinical trials and real-world studies. This study was conducted to describe the patterns of use of ceftazidime–avibactam (including indications and associated antibiotics), and the effectiveness and safety of ceftazidime–avibactam in real-world clinical practice. Methods This non-interventional medical chart review study was conducted in 11 countries across the European and Latin American (LATAM) regions. Consecutive patients treated in clinical practice with at least one dose of ceftazidime–avibactam for an approved indication per country label since 01 January 2018 (or launch date in the country if posterior) were enrolled. Effectiveness analyses were conducted in patients treated with ceftazidime–avibactam for at least 72 h. Results Of the 569 eligible patients enrolled, 516 (90.7%) were treated for at least 72 h (354 patients from Europe and 162 patients from LATAM); 390 patients (75.7%) had switched from another antibiotic line for Gram-negative coverage. Infection sources were intra-abdominal, urinary, respiratory, bloodstream infections, and other infections (approximately 20% each). K. pneumoniae was the most common microorganism identified in the latest microbiological evaluation before starting ceftazidime–avibactam (59.3%). Two-thirds of microorganisms tested for susceptibility were MDR, of which 89.3% were carbapenem-resistant. The common MDR mechanisms for K. pneumoniae were carbapenemase (33.9%), oxacillinase 48 (25.2%), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (21.5%), or metallo-beta-lactamase (14.2%) production. Without prior patient exposure, 17 isolates (mostly K. pneumoniae) were resistant to ceftazidime–avibactam. Treatment success was achieved in 77.3% of patients overall (88.3% among patients with urinary infection), regardless of first or second treatment line. In-hospital mortality rate was 23.1%. Adverse events were reported for six of the 569 patients enrolled. Conclusion This study provides important real-world evidence on treatment patterns, effectiveness, and safety of ceftazidime–avibactam in clinical practice through its recruitment in the European and LATAM regions. Ceftazidime–avibactam is one of the antibiotics to consider for treatment of MDR bacteria. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03923426.

It is not known whether sequential outpatient parenteral antimicrobial (OPAT) is as safe and effective as conventional hospitalization in patients with S. aureus bacteremia (SAB). A post-hoc analysis of the comparative effectiveness of conventional hospitalization versus sequential OPAT was performed in two prospective Spanish cohorts of patients with S. aureus bacteremia. The PROBAC cohort is a national, multicenter, prospective observational cohort of patients diagnosed in 22 Spanish hospitals between October 2016 and March 2017. The DOMUS OPAT cohort is a prospective observational cohort including patients from two university hospitals in Seville, Spain from 2012 to 2021. Multivariate regression was performed, including a propensity score (PS) for receiving OPAT, stratified analysis according to PS quartiles, and matched pair analyses based on PS. Four hundred and thirteen patients were included in the analysis: 150 in sequential OPAT and 263 in the full hospitalization therapy group. In multivariate analysis, including PS and center effect as covariates, 60-day treatment failure was lower in the OPAT group than in the full hospitalization group (p < 0.001; OR 0.275, 95%CI 0.129–0.584). In the PS-based matched analyses, sequential treatment under OPAT was not associated with higher 60-day treatment failure (p = 0.253; adjusted OR 0.660; % CI 0.324–1.345). OPAT is a safe and effective alternative to conventional in-patient therapy for completion of treatment in well-selected patients with SAB, mainly those associated with a low-risk source and without end-stage kidney disease.