Outcomes among patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia enrolled in a postdischarge outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy program at an academic medical center

Experience with dalbavancin use in various gram-positive infections within Aberdeen Royal Infirmary OPAT service

PURPOSE

Dalbavancin, approved in 2014 for Gram-positive acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), has pharmacokinetics enabling treatment with one or two doses. Dalbavancin might be useful in outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) of deep-seated infections, otherwise requiring inpatient admission. We documented our experience with pragmatic dalbavancin use to assess its effectiveness for varied indications, on- and off-label, as primary or sequential consolidation therapy.

METHODS

Patients prescribed dalbavancin between 1 December 2021 and 1 October 2022 were screened for demographics of age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), allergies, pathogens, doses of dalbavancin, other antibiotics administered and surgery. Where available, infection markers were recorded. The primary outcome was a cure at the end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included any adverse events and for those with treatment failures, response to salvage antibiotics.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven per cent of patients were cured. Cure rates by indication were 93% for ABSSSI, 100% for bacteraemia, 90% for acute osteomyelitis, 0% for chronic osteomyelitis, 75% for native joint septic arthritis and 33% for prosthetic joint infection. Most bone and joint infections that were not cured did not have source control, and the goal of treatment was suppressive. Successful suppression rates were greater at 48% for chronic osteomyelitis and 66% for prosthetic joint infections. Adverse events occurred in 14 of 102 patients.

CONCLUSION

This report adds to clinical experience with dalbavancin for off-label indications whilst further validating its role in ABSSSI. Dalbavancin as primary therapy in deep-seated infections merits investigation in formal clinical trials.

Parenteral Vancomycin in the Treatment of MRSA-Associated Diabetic Foot Infections: An Unnecessary Risk

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a common and costly complication of diabetes. Soft tissue and bone infections in DFIs frequently lead to amputation and/or sepsis which can be costly for both the patient and the healthcare system. Staphylococcus aureus is the most commonly identified causative agent in DFIs, and people with diabetes may have an increased risk of infection with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In addition to increased susceptibility to severe infection, MRSA in DFIs is associated with high rates of treatment failure, morbidity, and hospitalization costs meaning appropriate treatment is a high priority. While hospitalized patients are usually treated with intravenous (IV) vancomycin, this can be costly in terms of inpatient stays, staffing costs, and adverse events. For example, vancomycin-associated acute kidney injury not only delays hospital discharge and increases costs but is also a particular concern for patients with diabetes who already have an increased risk of kidney problems. Vancomycin-resistant strains of S. aureus have also been identified, which means that alternative treatment options may need to be explored. Treatment alternatives to IV vancomycin, including oral antibiotics, have been shown to provide similar efficacy, with reduced costs, outpatient or home-based administration, and with fewer serious adverse effects. Although infectious disease specialists often use IV vancomycin alone, or in combination, as a first-line therapeutic option, they are increasingly seeing the value of outpatient or at-home oral antibiotics as an alternative. This manuscript reviews the evidence for true costs of vancomycin therapy for MRSA-associated DFIs and examines the alternatives.

Conventional Hospitalization versus Sequential Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy for Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Post-Hoc Analysis of a Multicenter Observational Cohort

It is not known whether sequential outpatient parenteral antimicrobial (OPAT) is as safe and effective as conventional hospitalization in patients with S. aureus bacteremia (SAB). A post-hoc analysis of the comparative effectiveness of conventional hospitalization versus sequential OPAT was performed in two prospective Spanish cohorts of patients with S. aureus bacteremia. The PROBAC cohort is a national, multicenter, prospective observational cohort of patients diagnosed in 22 Spanish hospitals between October 2016 and March 2017. The DOMUS OPAT cohort is a prospective observational cohort including patients from two university hospitals in Seville, Spain from 2012 to 2021. Multivariate regression was performed, including a propensity score (PS) for receiving OPAT, stratified analysis according to PS quartiles, and matched pair analyses based on PS. Four hundred and thirteen patients were included in the analysis: 150 in sequential OPAT and 263 in the full hospitalization therapy group. In multivariate analysis, including PS and center effect as covariates, 60-day treatment failure was lower in the OPAT group than in the full hospitalization group (p < 0.001; OR 0.275, 95%CI 0.129−0.584). In the PS-based matched analyses, sequential treatment under OPAT was not associated with higher 60-day treatment failure (p = 0.253; adjusted OR 0.660; % CI 0.324−1.345). OPAT is a safe and effective alternative to conventional in-patient therapy for completion of treatment in well-selected patients with SAB, mainly those associated with a low-risk source and without end-stage kidney disease.