2020 ◽  

Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a relatively rare disease but with significant rates of morbidity and mortality. The goal of IE treatment is to eradicate the foci of infection, including antimicrobial therapy with or without surgery. The decision on the selection of an empirical therapy regimen is diverse and based on patient characteristics. Vancomycin and teicoplanin are bacteriostatic glycopeptide antibiotics used for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections, including MRSA-IE, and patients allergic to penicillin who are infected with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Objective: The current study aimed to compare the efficacy and adverse effects of vancomycin and teicoplanin in the treatment of patients with MRSA-IE. Materials and Methods: This parallel, randomized, and controlled trial study was carried out on the efficacy and safety of teicoplanin versus vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA endocarditis within August 2012 and April 2017. The present study recruited adult patients with a definite or possible diagnosis of IE based on the Modified Duke Criteria. A central computer-generated random number list was used to allocate the patients (1:1) to the treatment with teicoplanin or vancomycin. Vancomycin was intravenously administered at a dose of 30 mg/kg/day in two doses. Teicoplanin was administered at a loading dose of 6-12 mg/kg every 12 h in four doses and then continued once a day. Results: Out of 86 patients screened with suspected IE, 66 patients were randomly assigned to the vancomycin (n=33) and teicoplanin (n=33) groups. The mean age values of the study subjects were 41±11.8 and 39±13.1 years in the vancomycin and teicoplanin groups, respectively. In addition, 27 patients (81.8%) in the vancomycin group met the criteria for microbiological cure, compared to 25 subjects (89.3%) in the teicoplanin group. In this regard, the observed difference was not statistically significant (P=0.41). Moreover, 26 (78.8%) and 23 (82.1%) patients in the vancomycin and teicoplanin groups achieved clinical cure, respectively (P=0.97). Overall, the patients in the vancomycin group experienced more adverse events in comparison to those of the teicoplanin group (P=0.04). The rate of acute kidney injury over time, especially in the first week of therapy, was higher in the vancomycin group than that reported for the teicoplanin group (P=0.05). Six and four patients in the vancomycin and teicoplanin groups required dialysis, respectively. The use of dialysis was not different between the two groups (P=0.88). Seven (21.3%) and five (17.9%) patients in the vancomycin and teicoplanin groups died, respectively, which was not statistically different between the two groups (P=0.74). Conclusions: It was concluded that the administration of vancomycin or teicoplanin does not significantly change the outcome of patients undergoing empirical treatment for MRSA-IE. This finding indicates the patients are similar in clinical outcomes and mortalities despite some adverse effects, such as skin rashes; therefore, teicoplanin can be considered a treatment choice for these diseases.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Hiroki Ushirozako ◽  
Tomohiko Hasegawa ◽  
Yu Yamato ◽  
Go Yoshida ◽  
Tatsuya Yasuda ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVESurgical site infection (SSI) after posterior spinal surgery is one of the severe complications that may occur despite administration of prophylactic antibiotics and the use of intraoperative aseptic precautions. The use of intrawound vancomycin powder for SSI prevention is still controversial, with a lack of high-quality and large-scale studies. The purpose of this retrospective study using a propensity score–matched analysis was to clarify whether intrawound vancomycin powder prevents SSI occurrence after spinal surgery.METHODSThe authors analyzed 1261 adult patients who underwent posterior spinal surgery between 2010 and 2018 (mean age 62.3 years; 506 men, 755 women; follow-up period at least 1 year). Baseline and surgical data were assessed. After a preliminary analysis, a propensity score model was established with adjustments for age, sex, type of disease, and previously reported risk factors for SSI. The SSI rates were compared between patients with intrawound vancomycin powder treatment (vancomycin group) and those without (control group).RESULTSIn a preliminary analysis of 1261 unmatched patients (623 patients in the vancomycin group and 638 patients in the control group), there were significant differences between the groups in age (p = 0.041), body mass index (p = 0.013), American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (p < 0.001), malnutrition (p = 0.001), revision status (p < 0.001), use of steroids (p = 0.019), use of anticoagulation (p = 0.033), length of surgery (p = 0.003), estimated blood loss (p < 0.001), and use of instrumentation (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in SSI rates between the vancomycin and control groups (21 SSIs [3.4%] vs 33 SSIs [5.2%]; OR 0.640, 95% CI 0.368–1.111; p = 0.114). Using a one-to-one propensity score–matched analysis, 444 pairs of patients from the vancomycin and control groups were selected. There was no significant difference in the baseline and surgical data, except for height (p = 0.046), between both groups. The C-statistic for the propensity score model was 0.702. In the score-matched analysis, 12 (2.7%) and 24 (5.4%) patients in the vancomycin and control groups, respectively, developed SSIs (OR 0.486, 95% CI 0.243–0.972; p = 0.041). There were no systemic complications related to the use of vancomycin.CONCLUSIONSThe current study showed that intrawound vancomycin powder was useful in reducing the risk of SSI after posterior spinal surgery by half, without adverse events. Intrawound vancomycin powder use is a safe and effective procedure for SSI prevention.


1987 ◽  
Vol 392 ◽  
pp. 225-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail Folena-Wasserman ◽  
Robert D. Sitrin ◽  
Frederic Chapin ◽  
Kenneth M. Snader

2006 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Balzarini ◽  
Els Keyaerts ◽  
Leen Vijgen ◽  
Herman Egberink ◽  
Erik De Clercq ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
pp. 369-396
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Lancini ◽  
Bruno Cavalleri

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Vimberg ◽  
Radek Gazak ◽  
Zsolt Szűcs ◽  
Aniko Borbás ◽  
Pal Herczegh ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document