Arbekacin as an Alternative Drug to Teicoplanin for the Treatment of MRSA Infection

No abstract available.

Clinical Effectiveness and Nephrotoxicity of Aerosolized Colistin Treatment in Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Pneumonia / 대한중환자의학회지

BACKGROUND: Colistin (polymyxin E) is active against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB). However, the effectiveness of inhaled colistin is unclear. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness and safety of aerosolized colistin for the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by MDR-GNB. METHODS: In this retrospective longitudinal study, we evaluated the medical records of 63 patients who received aerosolized colistin treatment for VAP caused by MDR-GNB in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) from February 2012 to March 2014. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients with VAP caused by MDR-GNB were included in this study. The negative conversion rate was 84.6% after treatment, and acute kidney injury (AKI) occurred in 11 patients (44%, AKI group). The average length of MICU stay and colistin treatment- related factors, such as daily and total cumulative doses and administration period, were not significantly different between groups. In-hospital mortality tended to be higher in the AKI group (p = 0.07). Multivariate analysis showed that a body mass index less than 18 was an independent risk factor of mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 21.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.59-302.23; p = 0.02). Notably, AKI occurrence was closely related to the administration of more than two nephrotoxic drugs combined with aerosolized colistin (OR = 15.03, 95% CI 1.40-161.76; p = 0.025) and septic shock (OR = 8.10, 95% CI 1.40-161.76; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The use of adjunctive aerosolized colistin treatment appears to be a relatively safe and effective option for the treatment of VAP caused by MDR-GNB. However, more research on the concomitant use of nephrotoxic drugs with aerosolized colistin will be necessary, as this can be an important risk factor of development of AKI.

Clinical Effectiveness and Nephrotoxicity of Aerosolized Colistin Treatment in Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Pneumonia / 대한구급학회지

BACKGROUND: Colistin (polymyxin E) is active against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB). However, the effectiveness of inhaled colistin is unclear. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness and safety of aerosolized colistin for the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by MDR-GNB. METHODS: In this retrospective longitudinal study, we evaluated the medical records of 63 patients who received aerosolized colistin treatment for VAP caused by MDR-GNB in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) from February 2012 to March 2014. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients with VAP caused by MDR-GNB were included in this study. The negative conversion rate was 84.6% after treatment, and acute kidney injury (AKI) occurred in 11 patients (44%, AKI group). The average length of MICU stay and colistin treatment- related factors, such as daily and total cumulative doses and administration period, were not significantly different between groups. In-hospital mortality tended to be higher in the AKI group (p = 0.07). Multivariate analysis showed that a body mass index less than 18 was an independent risk factor of mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 21.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.59-302.23; p = 0.02). Notably, AKI occurrence was closely related to the administration of more than two nephrotoxic drugs combined with aerosolized colistin (OR = 15.03, 95% CI 1.40-161.76; p = 0.025) and septic shock (OR = 8.10, 95% CI 1.40-161.76; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The use of adjunctive aerosolized colistin treatment appears to be a relatively safe and effective option for the treatment of VAP caused by MDR-GNB. However, more research on the concomitant use of nephrotoxic drugs with aerosolized colistin will be necessary, as this can be an important risk factor of development of AKI.

Comparison of Arbekacin and Vancomycin in Treatment of Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media by Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major cause of ear infections. We attempted to evaluate the clinical usefulness of arbekacin in treating chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) by comparing its clinical efficacy and toxicity with those of vancomycin. Efficacy was classified according to bacterial elimination or bacteriologic failure and improved or failed clinical efficacy response. Ninety-five subjects were diagnosed with CSOM caused by MRSA. Twenty of these subjects were treated with arbekacin, and 36 with vancomycin. The bacteriological efficacy (bacterial elimination, arbekacin vs. vancomycin: 85.0% vs. 97.2%) and improved clinical efficacy (arbekacin vs. vancomycin; 90.0% vs. 97.2%) were not different between the two groups. However, the rate of complications was higher in the vancomycin group (33.3%) than in the arbekacin group (5.0%) (P=0.020). In addition, a total of 12 adverse reactions were observed in the vancomycin group; two for hepatotoxicity, one for nephrotoxicity, eight for leukopenia, two for skin rash, and one for drug fever. It is suggested that arbekacin be a good alternative drug to vancomycin in treatment of CSOM caused by MRSA.

The Efficacy and Safety of Arbekacin and Vancomycin for the Treatment in Skin and Soft Tissue MRSA Infection: Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has become a one of the most important causes of nosocomial infections, and use of vancomycin for the treatment of MRSA infection has increased. Unfortunately, vancomycin-resistant enterococcus have been reported, as well as vancomycin-resistant S. aureus. Arbekacin is an antibacterial agent and belongs to the aminoglycoside family of antibiotics. It was introduced to treat MRSA infection. We studied the clinical and bacteriological efficacy and safety of arbekacin compared to vancomycin in the treatment of infections caused by MRSA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective case-control study of patients who were admitted to tertiary Hospital from January 1st, 2009 to December 31st, 2010, and received the antibiotics arbekacin or vancomycin. All the skin and soft tissue MRSA infected patients who received arbekacin or vancomycin were enrolled during the study period. The bacteriological efficacy response (BER) was classified with improved and failure. The improved BER was defined as no growth of MRSA, where failure was defined as growth of MRSA, culture at the end of therapy or during treatment. Clinical efficacy response (CER) was classified as improved and failure. Improved CER was defined as resolution or reduction of the majority of signs and symptoms related to the original infection. Failure was defined as no resolution and no reduction of majority of the signs and symptoms, or worsening of one or more signs and symptoms, or new symptoms or signs associated with the original infection or a new infection. RESULTS: Totally, 122 patients (63/99 in arbekacin, 59/168 in vancomycin group) with skin and soft tissue infection who recieved arbekacin or vancomcyin at least 4 days were enrolled and analysed. The bacteriological efficacy response [improved, arbekacin vs vancomycin; 73.0% (46/63), 95% confidence interval (CI) 60.3 to 83.4% vs 83.1% (49/59), 95% CI 71.0 to 91.6%] and clinical efficacy response [improved, arbekacin vs vancomycin; 67.2% (41/61), 95% CI 52.0 to 76.7% vs 78.0% (46/59), 95% CI 65.3 to 87.7%] were similar between the two groups (P=0.264, 0.265). The complication rate was significantly higher in the vancomycin group [29/59(49.2%), 95% CI 35.9 to 62.5%] than arbekacin [10/63(15.9%), 95% CI 8.4 to 29.0%] (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Arbekacin could be considered as an alternative antibiotics for vancomycin in skin and soft tissue infection with MRSA. However, further prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm this finding.

Difference of Fistula Maturation Degree and Physical Property by the Types of Tube Material: An Experimental Study

PURPOSE: We recently experienced 3 consecutive cases of bile peritonitis due to tract rupture following T-tube removal at about 6 weeks after choledocholithotomy with using a new tube (1.1% silica-filled rubber). These unexpected cases of bile peritonitis have raised questions related to the tube material factor for the rupture. The aim of this study was to compare three kinds of T-tubes [ (100% silicone (SIL), 1.1% silica-filled rubber (SFR), and 100% rubber (RUB) ] from the point of view of fistula maturation as is related to the physicochemical properties of the tube materials. METHODS: SIL, SFR and RUB tubes were implanted into the subcutaneous space in rats. Histologically, the degree of fistula maturation was estimated by an inflammation score, the thickness of inflammation and the fibrosis. The physical properties of the tube materials were estimated by their modulus and elasticity. RESULTS: SFR and RUB tube had no statistically significant difference for the thickness of the inflammation and fibrosis. Yet there were difference in their modulus and elasticity. The modulus, elasticity, thickness of the inflammation and the fibrosis were difference in the SIL versus SFR and the SIL versus RUB. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences in the degree of fistula maturation between the SFR and RUB tubes. The rubber tube tended to show a more severe inflammatory reaction and better maturation of the fistula. Moreover, the flexibleness of the RUB tube make easy to experience collapse of the tube. The degree of maturation mostly depends upon the chemical property of the tube materials. However, the tract rupture that happens is due to the physical properties rather than the chemical properties of the tube. We recommend RUB for the T-tube to prevent the tube related complication such as tract rupture.