Abstract
Purpose
Although the antistaphylococcal penicillins remain the drugs of choice for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections, cefazolin and ceftriaxone are often prescribed due to their less frequent dosing and reduced cost. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and adverse events in patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) with ceftriaxone or cefazolin for the treatment of MSSA infections.
Methods
A retrospective study was carried out of 122 patients evaluated at Ben Taub and Lyndon B. Johnson General Hospitals in Houston, Texas, between January 1, 2006, and March 31, 2012, with a documented MSSA infection who received cefazolin or ceftriaxone as OPAT. A favorable clinical outcome was determined by their primary care physician’s assessment at follow-up in the clinic.
Results
Out of 122 patients, 78 (64 %) were treated with cefazolin and 44 (36 %) with ceftriaxone. Patients were predominantly young (median age 46 years), male (54.2 %), and Hispanic (51.2 %). Patients were similar in terms of baseline demographics, types of infections, and management of infections. Favorable clinical outcomes were similar between cefazolin and ceftriaxone (67.9 versus 79.8 %, p = 0.17), along with a similar incidence of adverse events and complications (5.1 versus 2.3 %, p = 0.65, and 26.9 versus 18.2 %, p = 0.38, respectively).
Conclusions
OPAT with either cefazolin or ceftriaxone is similar in terms of favorable outcomes, adverse events, and complications when treating MSSA infections. A randomized clinical trial is needed in order to confirm these results.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis. 1987;40:373–83.
Cox AM, Malani PN, Wiseman SW, Kauffman CA. Home intravenous antimicrobial infusion therapy: a viable option in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55:645–50.
Durack DT, Lukes AS, Bright DK. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: utilization of specific echocardiographic findings. Duke Endocarditis Service. Am J Med. 1994;96:200–9.
Guglielmo BJ, Luber AD, Paletta D Jr, Jacobs RA. Ceftriaxone therapy for staphylococcal osteomyelitis: a review. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;30:205–7.
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985;13:818–29.
Nannini EC, Singh KV, Murray BE. Relapse of type A beta-lactamase-producing Staphylococcus aureus native valve endocarditis during cefazolin therapy: revisiting the issue. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;37:1194–8.
Nannini EC, Stryjewski ME, Singh KV, Bourgogne A, Rude TH, Corey GR, Fowler VG Jr, Murray BE. Inoculum effect with cefazolin among clinical isolates of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: frequency and possible cause of cefazolin treatment failure. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:3437–41.
Nicholson SC, Welte T, File TM Jr, Strauss RS, Michiels B, Kaul P, Balis D, Arbit D, Amsler K, Noel GJ. A randomised, double-blind trial comparing ceftobiprole medocaril with ceftriaxone with or without linezolid for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalisation. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;39:240–6.
Paul M, Zemer-Wassercug N, Talker O, Lishtzinsky Y, Lev B, Samra Z, Leibovici L, Bishara J. Are all beta-lactams similarly effective in the treatment of methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia? Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010;17:1581–6.
Quinn EL, Pohlod D, Madhavan T, Burch K, Fisher E, Cox F. Clinical experiences with cefazolin and other cephalosporins in bacterial endocarditis. J Infect Dis. 1973;128:S386–91.
Sutherland R, Croydon EA, Rolinson GN. Flucloxacillin, a new isoxazolyl penicillin, compared with oxacillin, cloxacillin, and dicloxacillin. Br Med J. 1970;4:455–60.
Tice AD, Hoaglund PA, Shoultz DA. Outcomes of osteomyelitis among patients treated with outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. Am J Med. 2003;114:723–8.
Tice AD, Hoaglund PA, Shoultz DA. Risk factors and treatment outcomes in osteomyelitis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003;51:1261–8.
Tice AD, Rehm SJ, Dalovisio JR, Bradley JS, Martinelli LP, Graham DR, Gainer RB, Kunkel MJ, Yancey RW, Williams DN; IDSA. Practice guidelines for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. IDSA guidelines. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1651–72.
Wieland BW, Marcantoni JR, Bommarito KM, Warren DK, Marschall J. A retrospective comparison of ceftriaxone versus oxacillin for osteoarticular infections due to methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:585–90.
Winters RW, Parver AK, Sansbury JD. Home infusion therapy: a service and demographic profile: a report for the National Alliance for Infusion Therapy. Washington, DC: National Alliance for Infusion Therapy; 1992. p. 1–61.
Wynn M, Dalovisio JR, Tice AD, Jiang X. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for infections with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. South Med J. 2005;98:590–5.
Acknowledgments
The authors have no one to acknowledge.
Funding
There was no pharmaceutical financial support or grant for this study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Winans, S.A., Luce, A.M. & Hasbun, R. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: a comparison of cefazolin and ceftriaxone. Infection 41, 769–774 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-013-0477-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-013-0477-0