Literature DB >> 19567352

Linezolid treatment for gram-positive infections: a retrospective comparison with teicoplanin.

C Tascini1, G Gemignani, R Doria, G Biancofiore, L Urbani, C Mosca, P Malacarne, F Papineschi, C Passaglia, L Dal Canto, M Procaccini, G Furneri, G Didoni, F Filipponi, F Menichetti.   

Abstract

In randomized studies linezolid, indicated for Gram-positive infections, was as effective as teicoplanin in critical ill patients or was superior to teicoplanin in skin infection, pneumonia and bacteremia. We performed a 2-year comparative, retrospective study of patients treated with linezolid or teicoplanin in a single hospital for the same indications. We collected information about the type of infection, the responsible pathogen, therapy administered before study drugs, antibiotic associated with the study drugs, length of hospital stay (LOS), adverse events and outcome of the infections. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of linezolid in this retrospective patients series. Overall we identified 169 patients treated with linezolid and 91 with teicoplanin. Response to therapy, (resolution or improvement of infection) was better in patients treated with linezolid compared to teicoplanin (83.9% versus 69.2%, p=0.002). Response to therapy by type of pathogen showed the superior efficacy of linezolid against Staphylococcus aureus (including MRSA) and enterococci; although not statistically significant because of the small number of patients enrolled, they were close to significance (p<0.056 for S. aureus, p<0.055 for MRSA, p<0.061 for enterococci). Overall LOS in linezolid-treated patients was 4.6 days (p<0.041) less. Empirical use of linezolid reduced lOS by 6 days (p<0.038), especially in VAP and bacteremia patients (p<0.05). Mortality due to infection was 9.8% in both groups, and adverse events were most frequently documented in linezolid-treated patients. Linezolid was clinically superior to teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19567352     DOI: 10.1179/joc.2009.21.3.311

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chemother        ISSN: 1120-009X            Impact factor:   1.714


  5 in total

Review 1.  MRSA: treating people with infection.

Authors:  Nikolas Rae; Anna Jarchow-MacDonald; Dilip Nathwani; Charis Ann Marwick
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2016-02-16

Review 2.  MRSA: treating people with infection.

Authors:  Dilip Nathwani; Peter Garnet Davey; Charis Ann Marwick
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2010-10-28

Review 3.  Future challenges and treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia with emphasis on MRSA.

Authors:  Rasmus V Rasmussen; Vance G Fowler; Robert Skov; Niels E Bruun
Journal:  Future Microbiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.165

4.  Evaluation of a Paradigm Shift From Intravenous Antibiotics to Oral Step-Down Therapy for the Treatment of Infective Endocarditis: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Brad Spellberg; Henry F Chambers; Daniel M Musher; Thomas L Walsh; Arnold S Bayer
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 5.  Teicoplanin-A New Use for an Old Drug in the COVID-19 Era?

Authors:  Vladimir Vimberg
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-26
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.