scholarly journals Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Antibiotics in Osteoarticular Infections

2022 ◽  
Vol Volume 15 ◽  
pp. 99-110
Author(s):  
Lingling Liu ◽  
Jin Wang ◽  
Huan Zhang ◽  
Mengli Chen ◽  
Yun Cai
Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Eva Benavent ◽  
Laura Morata ◽  
Francesc Escrihuela-Vidal ◽  
Esteban Alberto Reynaga ◽  
Laura Soldevila ◽  
...  

Background: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-term use of tedizolid in osteoarticular infections. Methods: Multicentric retrospective study (January 2017–March 2019) of osteoarticular infection cases treated with tedizolid. Failure: clinical worsening despite antibiotic treatment or the need of suppressive treatment. Results: Cases (n = 51; 59% women, mean age of 65 years) included osteoarthritis (n = 27, 53%), prosthetic joint infection (n = 17, 33.3%), and diabetic foot infections (n = 9, 18%); where, 59% were orthopedic device-related. Most frequent isolates were Staphylococcus spp. (65%, n = 47; S. aureus, 48%). Reasons for choosing tedizolid were potential drug-drug interaction (63%) and cytopenia (55%); median treatment duration was 29 days (interquartile range -IQR- 15–44), 24% received rifampicin (600 mg once daily) concomitantly, and adverse events were scarce (n = 3). Hemoglobin and platelet count stayed stable throughout treatment (from 108.6 g/L to 116.3 g/L, p = 0.079; and 240 × 109/L to 239 × 109/L, p = 0.942, respectively), also in the subgroup of cases with cytopenia. Among device-related infections, 33% were managed with implant retention. Median follow-up was 630 days and overall cure rate 83%; among failures (n = 8), 63% were device-related infections. Conclusions: Long-term use of tedizolid was effective, showing a better safety profile with less myelotoxicity and lower drug-drug interaction than linezolid. Confirmation of these advantages could make tedizolid the oxazolidinone of choice for most of osteoarticular infections.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S236-S237
Author(s):  
Nanda Ramchandar ◽  
Jessica Burns ◽  
Andrew Pennock ◽  
Christopher R Cannavino ◽  
Lauge Farnaes

Abstract Background Osteoarticular infections are often encountered in the pediatric population. Therapy is guided by isolation of a putative organism, however, operative cultures are often negative. Next generation sequencing (NGS) allows for more sensitive sampling of body compartments generally considered sterile. We sought to evaluate the utility of NGS in comparison to culture in detecting a pathogenic organism in acute osteomyelitis and septic arthritis in children. Methods This was a single-site study to evaluate the utility of NGS in comparison to culture in detecting a pathogenic organism in acute osteomyelitis and septic arthritis in children. Eligible patients were all patients with osteomyelitis or septic arthritis admitted to Rady Children’s Hospital from July 2019 through July 2020. We excluded any patients with bone or joint surgery within 30 days prior to admission. Operative samples were chosen at the surgeon’s discretion (joint aspirate, synovium, or bone) based on operative findings. We compared NGS testing to standard care culture from the same site. Results We enrolled 41 subjects. NGS of the operative samples identified a pathogen in 26 (63.4%) patients versus 18 (43.9%) by culture. Operative culture missed the diagnosis in 10 cases, though PCR identified the organism in 6 of those cases (5 were cases in which Kingella kingae was identified). In 4 subjects, NGS identified a putative organism where standard care testing (either PCR or culture) was negative. NGS was falsely positive in 1 subject and falsely negative for one other subject. Sensitivity was 96.3% (CI 95%, 81.0–99.9%) and Specificity was 92.9% (CI 95%, 66.1–99.8) for NGS versus 64.3% (CI 95%, 44.1–81.4) and 84.6% (CI 95%, 54.6–99.9%) for culture respectively. Conclusion In this single site prospective study of pediatric osteoarticular infections, we demonstrate improved sensitivity and specificity of NGS testing when compared to standard culture. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2021 ◽  
Vol 142 ◽  
pp. 112053
Author(s):  
Florian Lemaitre ◽  
Fabien Fily ◽  
Jean-Baptiste Foulquier ◽  
Matthieu Revest ◽  
Vincent Jullien ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document