Summary Objectives Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common, often fatal infection. Our aim was to describe how its clinical presentation varies between populations and to identify common determinants of outcome. Methods We conducted a pooled analysis on 3395 consecutive adult patients with S. aureus bacteraemia. Patients were enrolled between 2006 and 2011 in five prospective studies in 20 tertiary care centres in Germany, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States. Results The median age of participants was 64 years (interquartile range 50–75 years) and 63.8% were male. 25.4% of infections were associated with diabetes mellitus, 40.7% were nosocomial, 20.6% were caused by methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), although these proportions varied significantly across studies. Intravenous catheters were the commonest identified infective focus (27.7%); 8.3% had endocarditis. Crude 14 and 90-day mortality was 14.6% and 29.2%, respectively. Age, MRSA bacteraemia, nosocomial acquisition, endocarditis, and pneumonia were independently associated with death, but a strong association was with an unidentified infective focus (adjusted hazard ratio for 90-day mortality 2.92; 95% confidence interval 2.33 to 3.67, p < 0.0001). Conclusion The baseline demographic and clinical features of S. aureus bacteraemia vary significantly between populations. Mortality could be reduced by assiduous MRSA control and early identification of the infective focus.
SummaryBackgroundStaphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection.MethodsIn this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants.FindingsBetween Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18–45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference −1·4%, 95% CI −7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68–1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3–4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005).InterpretationAdjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.
Increasing antibiotic resistance makes choosing antibiotics for suspected Gram-negative infection challenging. This study set out to identify key determinants of mortality among patients with Gram-negative bacteraemia, focusing particularly on the importance of appropriate empiric antibiotic treatment. We conducted a prospective observational study of 679 unselected adults with Gram-negative bacteraemia at ten acute english hospitals between October 2013 and March 2014. Appropriate empiric antibiotic treatment was defined as intravenous treatment on the day of blood culture collection with an antibiotic to which the cultured organism was sensitive in vitro. Mortality analyses were adjusted for patient demographics, co-morbidities and illness severity. The majority of bacteraemias were community-onset (70%); most were caused by Escherichia coli (65%), Klebsiella spp. (15%) or Pseudomonas spp. (7%). Main foci of infection were urinary tract (51%), abdomen/biliary tract (20%) and lower respiratory tract (14%). The main antibiotics used were co-amoxiclav (32%) and piperacillin-tazobactam (30%) with 34% receiving combination therapy (predominantly aminoglycosides). Empiric treatment was inappropriate in 34%. All-cause mortality was 8% at 7 days and 15% at 30 days. Independent predictors of mortality (p <0.05) included older age, greater burden of co-morbid disease, severity of illness at presentation and inflammatory response. Inappropriate empiric antibiotic therapy was not associated with mortality at either time-point (adjusted OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.35-1.94 and adjusted OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.50-1.66, respectively). Although our study does not exclude an impact of empiric antibiotic choice on survival in Gram-negative bacteraemia, outcome is determined primarily by patient and disease factors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.