Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: a comparison of cefazolin and ceftriaxone
- First Online:
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.
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.
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).
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.
KeywordsStaphylococcus aureus Ceftriaxone OPAT Cefazolin Methicillin-susceptible
- 7.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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.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.Google Scholar