4.2 Article

Assessment of Fosfomycin for Complicated or Multidrug-Resistant Urinary Tract Infections: Patient Characteristics and Outcomes

Journal

CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 62, Issue 2, Pages 100-104

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000449422

Keywords

Urinary tract infection; Uropathogen; Vancomycin-resistant enterococci; Carbapenemase; Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase

Funding

  1. Forest Pharmaceuticals/Actavis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Bacterial resistance among uropathogens is on the rise and has led to a decreased effectiveness of oral therapies. Fosfomycin tromethamine (fosfomycin) is indicated for uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) and displays in vitro activity against multidrug-resistant (MDR) isolates; however, clinical data assessing fosfomycin for the treatment of complicated or MDR UTIs are limited. Methods: We conducted a retrospective evaluation of patients who received >= 1 dose of fosfomycin between January 2009 and September 2015 for treatment of a UTI. Patients were included if they had a positive urine culture and documented signs/symptoms of a UTI. Results: Fifty-seven patients were included; 44 (77.2%) had complicated UTIs, 36 (63.2%) had MDR UTIs, and a total of 23 (40.4%) patients had a UTI that was both complicated and MDR. The majority of patients were female (66.7%) and elderly (median age, 79 years). Overall, the most common pathogens isolated were Escherichia coli (n = 28), Enterococcus spp. (n = 22), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 8). Twenty-eight patients (49.1%) were clinically evaluable; the preponderance achieved clinical success (96.4%). Fifteen out of 20 (75%) patients with repeat urine cultures had a microbiological cure. Conclusions: This retrospective study adds to the limited literature exploring alternative therapies for complicated and MDR UTIs with results providing additional evidence that fosfomycin may be an effective oral option. (C) 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available