4.7 Article

Polymyxin B versus other antimicrobials for the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 66, 期 1, 页码 175-179

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkq390

关键词

P; aeruginosa; colistin; treatment; mortality; multidrug resistance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To compare the efficacy of intravenous polymyxin B with other antimicrobials in the treatment of nosocomial Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia, assessing many potential confounding factors, including optimal dosage regimens of drugs. A retrospective cohort study was performed. Patients >= 18 years of age and who received appropriate therapy for >= 48 h for P. aeruginosa bacteraemia were analysed. Clinical covariates were assessed and compared between patients treated with polymyxin B and other drugs (comparators). Data were retrieved from medical records. Renal toxicity was also assessed. A Cox regression model was performed including variables with a P < 0.20 in the comparison between both groups. A total of 133 patients were included: 45 (33.8%) treated with polymyxin B and 88 (66.2%) with comparators. Most comparators (83.0%) were beta-lactams. The overall in-hospital mortality was 41.4% (55/133): 66.7% (30/45) and 28.4% (25/88) in polymyxin B and comparator groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The final multivariate model showed that treatment with polymyxin B was independently associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.91, 95% confidence interval 1.05-3.45), after adjustment for Pitt bacteraemia score, and the presence of mechanical ventilation and primary bloodstream infection. Patients treated with polymyxin B presented a higher rate of >= 100% increase in creatinine level from baseline than comparators [11/45 (24.4%) versus 4/88 (4.5%); P = 0.002], although this was not subjected to multivariate analysis. Intravenous polymyxin B therapy was inferior to other drugs in the treatment of P. aeruginosa bacteraemia, as indicated by the higher rate of in-hospital mortality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据