...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Infectious Diseases >Effectiveness of tigecycline-based versus colistin- based therapy for treatment of pneumonia caused by multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in a critical setting: a matched cohort analysis
【24h】

Effectiveness of tigecycline-based versus colistin- based therapy for treatment of pneumonia caused by multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in a critical setting: a matched cohort analysis

机译:基于替加环素和基于大肠菌素的疗法在关键环境中治疗多重耐药性鲍曼不动杆菌引起的肺炎的有效性:配对队列分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background Colistin and tigecycline have both been shown good in vitro activity among multi-drug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDRAB). A comparative study of colistin versus tigecycline for MDRAB pneumonia is lacking. Methods The study enrolled adults with MDRAB pneumonia admitted to intensive care units at a referral medical center during 2009–2010. Since there were no standardized minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) interpretation criteria of tigecycline against A. baumannii, MIC of tigecycline was not routinely tested at our hospital. During the study periods, MIC of colistin was not routinely tested also. We consider both colistin and tigecycline as definite treatments of MDRAB pneumonia. Patients who received tigecycline were selected as potential controls for those who had received colistin. We performed a propensity score analysis, by considering the criteria of age, gender, underlying diseases, and disease severity, in order to match and equalize potential prognostic factors and severity in the two groups. Results A total of 294 adults with MDRAB pneumonia were enrolled, including 119 who received colistin and 175 who received tigecycline. We matched 84 adults who received colistin with an equal number of controls who received tigecycline. The two well matched cohorts share similar characteristics: the propensity scores are colistin: 0.37 vs. tigecycline: 0.37, (P?=?.97); baseline creatinine (1.70 vs. 1.81, P?=?.50), and the APACHE II score (21.6 vs. 22.0, P?=?.99). The tigecycline group has an excess mortality of 16.7% (60.7% vs. 44%, 95% confidence interval 0.9% – 32.4%, P?=?.04). The excess mortality of tigecycline is significant only among those with MIC >2?μg/mL (10/12 vs. 37/84, P?=?.01), but not for those with MIC ≦ 2?μg/mL (4/10 vs. 37/84, P?=?.81). Conclusions Our data disfavors the use of tigecycline-based treatment in treating MDRAB pneumonia when tigecycline and colistin susceptibilities are unknown, since choosing tigecycline-based treatment might result in higher mortality. The excess mortality of tigecycline-based group may be related to higher MIC of tigecycline (> 2?μg/mL). Choosing tigecycline empirically for treating MDRAB pneumonia in the critical setting should be cautious.
机译:背景在多药耐药鲍曼不动杆菌(MDRAB)中,科利汀和替加环素均显示出良好的体外活性。缺乏粘菌素与替加环素治疗MDRAB肺炎的比较研究。方法该研究招募了2009-2010年间在转诊医疗中心接受重症监护病房的MDRAB肺炎成人。由于没有标准的替加环素对鲍曼不动杆菌的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)解释标准,因此我院未常规检测替加环素的MIC。在研究期间,也未常规检测粘菌素的MIC。我们认为粘菌素和替加环素都是MDRAB肺炎的明确治疗方法。选择接受替加环素治疗的患者作为接受粘菌素治疗的患者的潜在对照。我们通过考虑年龄,性别,潜在疾病和疾病严重程度的标准,进行了倾向得分分析,以匹配和均衡两组的潜在预后因素和严重程度。结果共纳入294例患有MDRAB肺炎的成人,其中119例接受粘菌素,175例接受替加环素。我们将84名接受大肠菌素的成人与同样数量的接受替加环素的对照组配对。这两个匹配良好的人群具有相似的特征:倾向评分为大肠菌素:0.37 vs.替加环素:0.37,(P≥= 0.97);基线肌酐(1.70 vs. 1.81,P?= ?. 50)和APACHE II评分(21.6 vs. 22.0,P?= ?. 99)。替加环素组的超额死亡率为16.7%(60.7%对44%,95%置信区间为0.9%– 32.4%,P == 0.04)。替加环素的超额死亡率仅在MIC> 2?μg/ mL的人群中才有意义(10/12与37/84,P?= ?. 01),而对于MIC≤2?μg/ mL的人群则无显着性(4 / 10对37/84,Pα=α.81)。结论当不知道替加环素和大肠粘菌素的敏感性时,我们的数据不利于使用基于替加环素的治疗来治疗MDRAB肺炎,因为选择基于替加环素的治疗可能导致更高的死亡率。以替加环素为基础的组的过高死亡率可能与替加环素的MIC较高(> 2?μg/ mL)有关。在危急情况下凭经验选择替加环素治疗MDRAB肺炎应谨慎。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号