ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The Infectious Diseases Society of America has recommended empiric therapy active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) for all community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). However, there is sparse data to support this recommendation. The objective of our study was to ascertain if such a practice improves outcomes. METHODS: This study was a secondary, retrospective analysis of the Community-Acquired Pneumonia Organization (CAPO) international database on CAP. Outcomes in patients admitted to the ICU were compared according to empiric initiation of anti-MRSA therapy (vancomycin or linezolid) with standard ICU CAP therapy (MRSA therapy group) or standard therapy alone for ICU CAP (standard therapy group). RESULTS: A total of 621 patients were identified with ICU pneumonia, of whom 57 patients had been initiated empirically on vancomycin or linezolid (MRSA therapy group). Patients of the MRSA therapy group had more comorbidities and were more severely ill than those of the standard therapy group. However, there were no statistical differences between the MRSA therapy group and standard therapy group for the primary outcomes of in-hospital and 28-day mortality, length of stay and time to clinical stability. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that empiric MRSA therapy in all ICU CAP patients may not improve outcomes and argue for clinician review of local epidemiologic trends on MRSA prevalence to ascertain the need for empiric MRSA coverage.
Subject(s)
Community-Acquired Infections/drug therapy , Intensive Care Units , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Pneumonia, Bacterial/drug therapy , Staphylococcal Infections/drug therapy , Acetamides/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Community-Acquired Infections/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Empirical Research , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Length of Stay , Linezolid , Male , Middle Aged , Oxazolidinones/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Bacterial/epidemiology , Prevalence , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome , Vancomycin/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Data supporting a quinolone or a macrolide as preferred therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) due to Legionella pneumophila are not firmly established. Some literature suggests a benefit of quinolones over macrolides. OBJECTIVE: To compare time to clinical stability (TCS) and length of hospital stay (LOS) in patients with Legionella pneumonia who were treated with levofloxacin (LVX) compared to those treated with newer macrolides. DESIGN: An analysis of patients with Legionnaires' disease from the Community-Acquired Pneumonia Organization database was performed. Patients were diagnosed with CAP using radiographic and clinical criteria, while Legionella was detected by urinary antigen or sputum culture. All patients received a macrolide (azithromycin or clarithromycin) or LVX. TCS was defined as the time from hospital admission to candidacy for switch to oral therapy. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients were included for analysis. The mean TCS for the macrolide group was 5.1 days vs. 4.3 days for the LVX group (P = 0.43). The mean LOS for the macrolide group was 12.7 days vs. 8.9 days for the quinolone group (P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: LOS and TCS were not statistically different between the macrolide and the LVX groups in treating CAP due to Legionella, despite trends in both outcomes favoring LVX.
