Ceft to ceft study real life experience with ceftaroline drug, ceft to ceft study real life experience with ceftaroline package, ceft to ceftriaxone, 1923 nothing left to lose, ceft to ceft study real life experience with ceftaroline and tetracycline, ceft to ceft study real life experience with ceftaroline fosamil, no tears left to cry, ceft to ceft study abroad, ceft to ceft study real life experience with ceftaroline cost, ceft to ceft study4, ceft to ceft study real life experience with ceftaroline coverage, ceft to ceft study fetch, ceft to ceftolozane/tazobactam.
Ceft-to-Ceft Study: Real-Life Experience with Ceftaroline and Ceftobiprole in Treatment of the Principal Infectious Syndromes in a Spanish Multicenter Hospital Cohort.
Abstract
To compare the real-life effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil (ceftaroline-F) and ceftobiprole medocaril (ceftobiprole-M) for infections in hospitalized patients. This comparative, observational, retrospective, and multicenter Spanish study included patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) and hospitalized patients treated for at least 48 h with ceftaroline-F or ceftobiprole-M between their first incorporation in the clinical protocol of each hospital and 31 July 2022. Ceftaroline-F was administered to 227 patients and ceftobiprole-M to 212. In comparison to the latter, ceftaroline-F-treated participants were younger (63.02 vs. 66.40 years, OR 1.1; 95%CI: 1.001-1.05) and had higher rates of septic shock (OR 0.27; 95%CI: 0.09-0.81) and higher frequencies of targeted (57.7 vs. 29.7%; OR: 0.35; 95%CI: 0.18-0.69) and combined (89.0 vs. 45.8%, OR: 0.13; 95%CI: 0.06-0.28) therapies that were second line or more (82.4% vs. 64.6%%; OR 0.35; 95%CI: 0.18-0.69), and higher rates of infections due to Gram-positive cocci (92.7 vs. 64.7%, p = 0.001), bacteremia (51.9 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.001), infective endocarditis (24.2 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.0001), and mechanical ventilation-associated pneumonia (8.8 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.0001). Ceftobiprole-M was more frequently administered against polymicrobial infections (38.1 vs. 14.0%, p = 0.001), those produced by Gram-negative bacilli (19.7 vs. 6.0%, p = 0.0001), nosocomial pneumonia (33 vs. 10.6%, p = 0.0001), and skin and soft-tissue infections (25.4 vs. 10.1%, p = 0.0001). Patients treated with ceftaroline-F had a longer hospital stay (36 (IQR: 19-60) vs. 19.50 (IQR: 12-30.75, p = 0.0001) days), with no difference in infection-related mortality at 14 (13.2 vs. 8.0%, p = 0.078) or 28 (4.8 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.415) days or in dropout rate for adverse effects (2.2 vs. 0.9%; p = 1). The fifth-generation cephalosporins, ceftaroline-F and ceftobiprole-M, are safe and effective in real life, with no difference b etween them in health outcomes.
Authors (7) : Daniel Arnés García, Inés Pitto-Robles, Jorge Calderón Parra, Marina Calvo Salvador, Carmen Herrero Rodríguez, Laura Gisbert, Carmen Hidalgo-Tenorio
Source : Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)
Article Information
| Year | 2023 |
| Type | Journal Article |
| DOI | 10.3390/antibiotics12121692 |
| ISSN | 2079-6382 |
| Volume | 12 |
You can download journal here :
If You have any problem, contact us here
