Ceftazidime–Avibactam-Based Versus Tigecycline-Based Regimen for the Treatment of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae-Induced Pneumonia in Critically Ill Patients
Introduction The aim of the present study was to assess the safety profile and outcomes of a ceftazidime–avibactam (CAZ-AVI)-based regimen and compare them with those of a tigecycline (TGC)-based regimen in intensive care unit (ICU) for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CR...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Infectious diseases and therapy 2021-12, Vol.10 (4), p.2721-2734 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Introduction
The aim of the present study was to assess the safety profile and outcomes of a ceftazidime–avibactam (CAZ-AVI)-based regimen and compare them with those of a tigecycline (TGC)-based regimen in intensive care unit (ICU) for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant
Klebsiella pneumoniae
(CRKP), which is classified into hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).
Methods
Clinical and microbiological cure rates, 28-day survival rates, and safety evaluation findings were compared between patients treated with CAZ-AVI-based regimen and those treated with TGC-based regimen in this retrospective study. Conventional multivariate logistic regression analysis and regression adjustment analysis with propensity score (PS) were performed to control for confounding variables.
Results
A total of 105 cases of critically ill ICU patients with CRKP-induced HAP or VAP were included in the present study from July 2019 to September 2020; 62 patients (59%) received TGC-based regimen and 43 patients (41%) received CAZ-AVI-based regimen. The most common concomitant agent in the CAZ-AVI group and TGC group was carbapenem (44.2% versus 62.9%,
P
= 0.058), while only a small proportion of the study population received CAZ-AVI and TGC monotherapy (20.9% versus 6.5%,
P
= 0.027). The clinical and microbiological cure rates of the CAZ-AVI group were superior to those of the TGC group [51.2% versus 29.0% (
P
= 0.022) and 74.4% versus 33.9% (
P
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 2193-8229 2193-6382 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s40121-021-00542-3 |