4.7 Article

Efficacy of ertapenem in the treatment of early ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing organisms in an intensive care unit

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 60, 期 2, 页码 433-435

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkm180

关键词

carbapenems; hospital; Klebsiella pneumoniae; Enterobacter cloacae; Proteus mirabilis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a frequent complication of patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Ertapenem is a newer carbapenem with good in vitro activity against extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing organisms. However, there are no clinical data to support the use of ertapenem in VAP. Our purpose is to evaluate the usefulness and safety of ertapenem in the treatment of VAP caused by susceptible ESBL strains. Methods: Ertapenem 1 g daily intravenously was given to adult patients with signs and symptoms of VAP beginning within 7 days of mechanical ventilation and caused by ESBL-producing Gram-negative organisms. Results: From June 2005 to June 2006, we enrolled 20 adult patients hospitalized in an ICU and diagnosed with VAP due to Gram-negative ESBL strains. Causative organisms identified as ESBL producers susceptible to ertapenem were Klebsielia pneumoniae (alone in 10 cases and with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in 4 cases), Enterobacter cloacae (2), Proteus mirabilis (2) and Citrobacter freundii (2). Clinical success was achieved in 16/20 (80%) of the clinically evaluable patients and in 15/20 (75%) of the microbiologically evaluable patients. The drug was well-tolerated; one patient presented a transient increase in liver enzymes. Conclusions: We believe this is one of the first reports to demonstrate that ertapenem has clinical utility in treating serious infections caused by ESBL-producing organisms. Ertapenem appears to be suitable for ESBL VAP therapy. This pilot study suggests subsequent controlled randomized trials in this indication.

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