Cargando…

Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the comparative efficacy of fosfomycin vs ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with outpatient oral fosfomycin vs int...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wald-Dickler, Noah, Lee, Todd C, Tangpraphaphorn, Soodtida, Butler-Wu, Susan M, Wang, Nina, Degener, Tyler, Kan, Carolyn, Phillips, Matthew C, Cho, Edward, Canamar, Catherine, Holtom, Paul, Spellberg, Brad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8754378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35036466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab620
_version_ 1784632262248103936
author Wald-Dickler, Noah
Lee, Todd C
Tangpraphaphorn, Soodtida
Butler-Wu, Susan M
Wang, Nina
Degener, Tyler
Kan, Carolyn
Phillips, Matthew C
Cho, Edward
Canamar, Catherine
Holtom, Paul
Spellberg, Brad
author_facet Wald-Dickler, Noah
Lee, Todd C
Tangpraphaphorn, Soodtida
Butler-Wu, Susan M
Wang, Nina
Degener, Tyler
Kan, Carolyn
Phillips, Matthew C
Cho, Edward
Canamar, Catherine
Holtom, Paul
Spellberg, Brad
author_sort Wald-Dickler, Noah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the comparative efficacy of fosfomycin vs ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with outpatient oral fosfomycin vs intravenous ertapenem at 3 public hospitals in Los Angeles County between January 2018 and September 2020. The primary outcome was resolution of clinical symptoms 30 days after diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 322 patients with cUTI treated with fosfomycin (n = 110) or ertapenem (n = 212) meeting study criteria. The study arms had similar demographics, although patients treated with ertapenem more frequently had pyelonephritis or bacteremia while fosfomycin-treated patients had more retained catheters, nephrolithiasis, or urinary obstruction. Most infections were due to extended-spectrum β-lactamase–producing E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, 80%–90% of which were resistant to other oral options. Adjusted odds ratios for clinical success at 30 days, clinical success at last follow-up, and relapse were 1.21 (95% CI, 0.68–2.16), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.46–1.52), and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.52–1.70) for fosfomycin vs ertapenem, respectively. Patients treated with fosfomycin had significant reductions in length of hospital stay and length of antimicrobial therapy and fewer adverse events (1 vs 10). Fosfomycin outcomes were similar irrespective of duration of lead-in intravenous (IV) therapy or fosfomycin dosing interval (daily, every other day, every third day). CONCLUSIONS: These results would support the conduct of a randomized controlled trial to verify efficacy. In the meantime, they suggest that fosfomycin may be a reasonable stepdown from IV antibiotics for cUTI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8754378
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87543782022-01-13 Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study Wald-Dickler, Noah Lee, Todd C Tangpraphaphorn, Soodtida Butler-Wu, Susan M Wang, Nina Degener, Tyler Kan, Carolyn Phillips, Matthew C Cho, Edward Canamar, Catherine Holtom, Paul Spellberg, Brad Open Forum Infect Dis Major Article BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the comparative efficacy of fosfomycin vs ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with outpatient oral fosfomycin vs intravenous ertapenem at 3 public hospitals in Los Angeles County between January 2018 and September 2020. The primary outcome was resolution of clinical symptoms 30 days after diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 322 patients with cUTI treated with fosfomycin (n = 110) or ertapenem (n = 212) meeting study criteria. The study arms had similar demographics, although patients treated with ertapenem more frequently had pyelonephritis or bacteremia while fosfomycin-treated patients had more retained catheters, nephrolithiasis, or urinary obstruction. Most infections were due to extended-spectrum β-lactamase–producing E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, 80%–90% of which were resistant to other oral options. Adjusted odds ratios for clinical success at 30 days, clinical success at last follow-up, and relapse were 1.21 (95% CI, 0.68–2.16), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.46–1.52), and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.52–1.70) for fosfomycin vs ertapenem, respectively. Patients treated with fosfomycin had significant reductions in length of hospital stay and length of antimicrobial therapy and fewer adverse events (1 vs 10). Fosfomycin outcomes were similar irrespective of duration of lead-in intravenous (IV) therapy or fosfomycin dosing interval (daily, every other day, every third day). CONCLUSIONS: These results would support the conduct of a randomized controlled trial to verify efficacy. In the meantime, they suggest that fosfomycin may be a reasonable stepdown from IV antibiotics for cUTI. Oxford University Press 2021-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8754378/ /pubmed/35036466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab620 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Major Article
Wald-Dickler, Noah
Lee, Todd C
Tangpraphaphorn, Soodtida
Butler-Wu, Susan M
Wang, Nina
Degener, Tyler
Kan, Carolyn
Phillips, Matthew C
Cho, Edward
Canamar, Catherine
Holtom, Paul
Spellberg, Brad
Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
title Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
title_fullStr Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full_unstemmed Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
title_short Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
title_sort fosfomycin vs ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections: a multicenter, retrospective cohort study
topic Major Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8754378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35036466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab620
work_keys_str_mv AT walddicklernoah fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT leetoddc fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT tangpraphaphornsoodtida fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT butlerwususanm fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wangnina fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT degenertyler fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT kancarolyn fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT phillipsmatthewc fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT choedward fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT canamarcatherine fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT holtompaul fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy
AT spellbergbrad fosfomycinvsertapenemforoutpatienttreatmentofcomplicatedurinarytractinfectionsamulticenterretrospectivecohortstudy