New agents for Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis

A comparison of different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis is a microbial infection of the endocardial surface of the heart. Antibiotics are the cornerstone of treatment, but due to the differences in presentation, populations affected, and the wide variety of micro-organisms that can be responsible, their use is not standardised. This is an update of a review previously published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the existing evidence about the clinical benefits and harms of different antibiotics regimens used to treat people with infective endocarditis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase Classic and Embase, LILACS, CINAHL, and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on 6 January 2020. We also searched three trials registers and handsearched the reference lists of included papers. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of antibiotic regimens for treating definitive infective endocarditis diagnosed according to modified Duke's criteria. We considered all-cause mortality, cure rates, and adverse events as the primary outcomes. We excluded people with possible infective endocarditis and pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction in duplicate. We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables and used GRADE methodology to assess the quality of the evidence. We described the included studies narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Six small RCTs involving 1143 allocated/632 analysed participants met the inclusion criteria of this first update. The included trials had a high risk of bias. Three trials were sponsored by drug companies. Due to heterogeneity in outcome definitions and different antibiotics used data could not be pooled. The included trials compared miscellaneous antibiotic schedules having uncertain effects for all of the prespecified outcomes in this review. Evidence was either low or very low quality due to high risk of bias and very low number of events and small sample size. The results for all-cause mortality were as follows: one trial compared quinolone (levofloxacin) plus standard treatment (antistaphylococcal penicillin (cloxacillin or dicloxacillin), aminoglycoside (tobramycin or netilmicin), and rifampicin) versus standard treatment alone and reported 8/31 (26%) with levofloxacin plus standard treatment versus 9/39 (23%) with standard treatment alone; risk ratio (RR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 2.56. One trial compared fosfomycin plus imipenem 3/4 (75%) versus vancomycin 0/4 (0%) (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.47 to 103.27), and one trial compared partial oral treatment 7/201 (3.5%) versus conventional intravenous treatment 13/199 (6.53%) (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.31). The results for rates of cure with or without surgery were as follows: one trial compared daptomycin versus low-dose gentamicin plus an antistaphylococcal penicillin (nafcillin, oxacillin, or flucloxacillin) or vancomycin and reported 9/28 (32.1%) with daptomycin versus 9/25 (36%) with low-dose gentamicin plus antistaphylococcal penicillin or vancomycin; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.89. One trial compared glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin) plus gentamicin with cloxacillin plus gentamicin (13/23 (56%) versus 11/11 (100%); RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.85). One trial compared ceftriaxone plus gentamicin versus ceftriaxone alone (15/34 (44%) versus 21/33 (64%); RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.10), and one trial compared fosfomycin plus imipenem versus vancomycin (1/4 (25%) versus 2/4 (50%); RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.55). The included trials reported adverse events, the need for cardiac surgical interventions, and rates of uncontrolled infection, congestive heart failure, relapse of endocarditis, and septic emboli, and found no conclusive differences between groups (very low-quality evidence). No trials assessed quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This first update confirms the findings of the original version of the review. Limited and low to very low-quality evidence suggests that the comparative effects of different antibiotic regimens in terms of cure rates or other relevant clinical outcomes are uncertain. The conclusions of this updated Cochrane Review were based on few RCTs with a high risk of bias. Accordingly, current evidence does not support or reject any regimen of antibiotic therapy for the treatment of infective endocarditis.

The global prevalence of Daptomycin, Tigecycline, Quinupristin/Dalfopristin, and Linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (MRCoNS) are among the main causes of nosocomial infections, which have caused major problems in recent years due to continuously increasing spread of various antibiotic resistance features. Apparently, vancomycin is still an effective antibiotic for treatment of infections caused by these bacteria but in recent years, additional resistance phenotypes have led to the accelerated introduction of newer agents such as linezolid, tigecycline, daptomycin, and quinupristin/dalfopristin (Q/D). Due to limited data availability on the global rate of resistance to these antibiotics, in the present study, the resistance rates of S. aureus, Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), and CoNS to these antibiotics were collected.

METHOD

Several databases including web of science, EMBASE, and Medline (via PubMed), were searched (September 2018) to identify those studies that address MRSA, and CONS resistance to linezolid, tigecycline, daptomycin, and Q/D around the world.

RESULT

Most studies that reported resistant staphylococci were from the United States, Canada, and the European continent, while African and Asian countries reported the least resistance to these antibiotics. Our results showed that linezolid had the best inhibitory effect on S. aureus. Although resistances to this antibiotic have been reported from different countries, however, due to the high volume of the samples and the low number of resistance, in terms of statistical analyzes, the resistance to this antibiotic is zero. Moreover, linezolid, daptomycin and tigecycline effectively (99.9%) inhibit MRSA. Studies have shown that CoNS with 0.3% show the lowest resistance to linezolid and daptomycin, while analyzes introduced tigecycline with 1.6% resistance as the least effective antibiotic for these bacteria. Finally, MRSA and CoNS had a greater resistance to Q/D with 0.7 and 0.6%, respectively and due to its significant side effects and drug-drug interactions; it appears that its use is subject to limitations.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that resistance to new agents is low in staphylococci and these antibiotics can still be used for treatment of staphylococcal infections in the world.

Nephrologists Hate the Dialysis Catheters: A Systemic Review of Dialysis Catheter Associated Infective Endocarditis

A 53-year-old Egyptian female with end stage renal disease, one month after start of hemodialysis via an internal jugular catheter, presented with fever and shortness of breath. She developed desquamating vesiculobullous lesions, widespread on her body. She was in profound septic shock and broad spectrum antibiotics were started with appropriate fluid replenishment. An echocardiogram revealed bulky leaflets of the mitral valve with a highly mobile vegetation about 2.3 cm long attached to the anterior leaflet. CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis showed bilateral pleural effusions in the chest, with triangular opacities in the lungs suggestive of infarcts. There was splenomegaly with triangular hypodensities consistent with splenic infarcts. Blood cultures repeatedly grew Candida albicans. Despite parenteral antifungal therapy, the patient deteriorated over the course of 5 days. She died due to a subsequent cardiac arrest. Systemic review of literature revealed that the rate of infection varies amongst the various types of accesses, and it is well documented that AV fistulas have a much less rate of infection in comparison to temporary catheters. All dialysis units should strive to make a multidisciplinary effort to have a referral process early on, for access creation, and to avoid catheters associated morbidity.

Right-Sided Infective Endocarditis and Pulmonary Infiltrates: An Update

Sixty years after its initial description, right-sided infective endocarditis (RSIE) still poses a challenge to all medical practitioners. Epidemiological data reveal a rising incidence attributable to the global surge in the number of intravenous drug users and the increased use of central vascular catheters and implantable cardiac devices. RSIE differs from left-sided infective endocarditis in more than just the location of the involved cardiac valve. They have different clinical presentations, diagnostic findings, and prognoses; hence, they require different management strategies. Cardiac murmurs and systemic emboli are usually absent in RSIE, whereas pulmonary embolism and its related complications dominate the clinical picture. Diagnostic delay of RSIE is secondary to the similarity in its initial presentation to other entities. Complications may ensue as a result of this delay. Diagnosis can be initially confirmed by using transthoracic echocardiography, except in patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillator, where a transesophageal echocardiogram is necessary. Various factors may increase mortality and morbidity in RSIE such as tricuspid valve vegetation size, fungal etiology, and low CD4 cell count in HIV patients. Oxacillin and vancomycin had been the traditionally used agents for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, respectively. More recently, daptomycin has shown promising results, which has led to its Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the treatment of S. aureus bacteremia and associated RSIE. The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive update on RSIE including epidemiology, pathogenesis, microbiology, diagnosis, management, and prognosis.

Daptomycin Use After Vancomycin-Induced Neutropenia in a Patient with Left-Sided Endocarditis

Objective:

To report a positive outcome in a patient treated with daptomycin for left-sided endocarditis associated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) subsequent to vancomycin-induced neutropenia.

Case Summary:

A 55-year-old African American male was diagnosed with left-sided endocarditis, brain abscesses, and septic arthritis due to community-acquired MRSA. He began treatment with intravenous vancomycin to achieve a trough concentration of 15–20 μg/mL and oral rifampin 600 mg/day. A repair and resection of the mitral valve was completed on day 15 of hospitalization. Vancomycin was discontinued on day 36 secondary to drug-induced neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count nadir 162 cells/μL). Intravenous therapy with daptomycin 6 mg/kg every 24 hours was then initiated and the neutropenia resolved. The patient was discharged from the hospital on day 56.

Discussion:

Upon discontinuation of vancomycin, treatment options were limited to a small number of alternatives. Documented clinical experience and relevant studies are limited regarding the use of quinupristin/dalfopristin (Q/D), linezolid, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX), and daptomycin for the treatment of MRSA left-sided endocarditis. Daptomycin was selected because of its bactericidal qualities and its recent approval for this indication. The prognostic outlook for use of daptomycin in this treatment was uncertain; however, Q/D, linezolid, and TMP/SMX posed greater risks of failure.

Conclusions:

Treatment of MRSA left-sided endocarditis in patients intolerant to vancomycin is challenging. The positive outcome in our patient is likely attributable to aggressive vancomycin dosing and extended duration of treatment prior to the initiation of daptomycin. The use of daptomycin in this case enabled successful management of left-sided endocarditis.

A comparison of different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis is a microbial infection of the endocardial surface of the heart. Antibiotics are the cornerstone of treatment, but their use is not standardised, due to the differences in presentation, populations affected and the wide variety of micro-organisms that can be responsible.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the existing evidence about the clinical benefits and harms of different antibiotics regimens used to treat people with infective endocarditis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE Classic and EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index on 30 April 2015. We also searched three trials registers and handsearched the reference lists of included papers. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of antibiotic regimens for treating possible infective endocarditis diagnosed according to modified Duke's criteria. We considered all-cause mortality, cure rates and adverse events as the primary outcomes. We excluded people with possible infective endocarditis and pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction in duplicate. We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables and used GRADE methodology to assess the quality of studies. We described the included studies narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Four small randomised controlled trials involving 728 allocated/224 analysed participants met our inclusion criteria. These trials had a high risk of bias. Drug companies sponsored two of the trials. We were unable to pool the data due to the heterogeneity in outcome definitions and the different antibiotics used.The included trials compared the following antibiotic schedules. The first trial compared quinolone (levofloxacin) plus standard treatment (anti-staphylococcal penicillin (cloxacillin or dicloxacillin), aminoglycoside (tobramycin or netilmicin) and rifampicin) versus standard treatment alone reporting uncertain effects on all-cause mortality (8/31 (26%) with levofloxacin plus standard treatment versus 9/39 (23%) with standard treatment alone; RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.56, very low quality evidence). The second trial compared daptomycin versus low-dose gentamicin plus an anti-staphylococcal penicillin (nafcillin, oxacillin or flucloxacillin) or vancomycin. This showed uncertain effects in terms of cure rates (9/28 (32.1%) with daptomycin versus 9/25 (36%) with low-dose gentamicin plus anti-staphylococcal penicillin or vancomycin, RR 0.89 95% CI 0.42 to 1.89; very low quality evidence). The third trial compared cloxacillin plus gentamicin with a glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin) plus gentamicin. In participants receiving gentamycin plus glycopeptide only 13/23 (56%) were cured versus 11/11 (100%) receiving cloxacillin plus gentamicin (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.85; very low quality evidence). The fourth trial compared ceftriaxone plus gentamicin versus ceftriaxone alone and found no conclusive differences in terms of cure (15/34 (44%) with ceftriaxone plus gentamicin versus 21/33 (64%) with ceftriaxone alone, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.10; very low quality evidence).The trials reported adverse events, need for cardiac surgical interventions, uncontrolled infection and relapse of endocarditis and found no conclusive differences between comparison groups (very low quality evidence). No trials assessed septic emboli or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited and very low quality evidence suggested that there were no conclusive differences between antibiotic regimens in terms of cure rates or other relevant clinical outcomes. However, because of the very low quality evidence, this needs confirmation. The conclusion of this Cochrane review was based on randomised controlled trials with high risk of bias. Accordingly, current evidence does not support or reject any regimen of antibiotic therapy for treatment of infective endocarditis.

Efficacy of usual and high doses of daptomycin in combination with rifampin versus alternative therapies in experimental foreign-body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

The treatment of prosthetic joint infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) continues to be a challenge for the clinician. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacies of daptomycin at usual and high doses (equivalent to 6 and 10 mg/kg of body weight/day, respectively, in humans) and in combination with rifampin and to compare the activities to those of conventional anti-MRSA therapies. We used MRSA strain HUSA 304, with the following MICs and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBCs), respectively: daptomycin, 1 μg/ml and 4 μg/ml; vancomycin, 2 μg/ml and 4 μg/ml; linezolid, 2 μg/ml and >32 μg/ml; and rifampin, 0.03 μg/ml and 0.5 μg/ml. In time-kill curves, only daptomycin and its combinations with rifampin achieved a bactericidal effect in log and stationary phases. For in vivo studies, we used a rat foreign-body infection model. Therapy was administered for 7 days with daptomycin at 100 mg/kg/day and 45/mg/kg/day, vancomycin at 50 mg/kg/12 h, rifampin at 25 mg/kg/12 h, and linezolid at 35 mg/kg/12 h, and each antibiotic was also combined with rifampin. Among monotherapies, daptomycin at 100 mg/kg/day and rifampin performed better than vancomycin and linezolid. In combination with rifampin, both dosages of daptomycin were significantly better than all other combinations, but daptomycin at 100 mg/kg/day plus rifampin achieved better cure rates at day 11 (P < 0.05) than daptomycin at 45 mg/kg/day plus rifampin. Resistant strains were found in monotherapies with rifampin and daptomycin at 45 mg/kg/day. In conclusion, daptomycin at high doses was the most effective monotherapy and also improved the efficacy of the combination with rifampin against foreign-body infections by MRSA. Clinical studies should confirm whether this combination may be considered the first-line treatment for foreign-body infections by MRSA in humans.

Successful treatment of vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus pacemaker lead infective endocarditis with telavancin

Emerging infections caused by vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) isolates are more likely to be associated with treatment failures than infections caused by other types of S. aureus. We present a case of pacemaker lead infective endocarditis caused by a non-daptomycin-susceptible strain of VISA. After 8 weeks of parenteral telavancin therapy, the patient achieved microbiological and clinical cure.

Efficacy of high doses of daptomycin versus alternative therapies against experimental foreign-body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Since the currently approved dose of daptomycin (6 mg/kg of body weight/day) has been associated with clinical failures and resistance development, higher doses for some difficult-to-treat infections are being proposed. We studied the efficacy of daptomycin at high doses (equivalent to 10 mg/kg/day in humans) and compared it to that of reference and alternative treatments in a model of foreign-body infection with methicillin (meticillin)-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. In vitro studies were conducted with bacteria in the log and stationary phases. For the in vivo model, therapy with daptomycin at 100 mg/kg/day, vancomycin at 50 mg/kg/12 h, rifampin (rifampicin) at 25 mg/kg/12 h, or linezolid at 35 mg/kg/12 h was administered for 7 days. Antibiotic efficacy was evaluated using either bacteria from tissue cage fluids or those attached to coverslips. We screened for the emergence of linezolid- and rifampin-resistant strains and analyzed the surviving population from the daptomycin-treated group. Only daptomycin was bactericidal in both the log- and stationary-phase studies. Daptomycin (decrease in the log number of CFU per milliliter of tissue cage fluid, 2.57) and rifampin (decrease, 2.6 log CFU/ml) were better (P < 0.05) than vancomycin (decrease, 1.1 log CFU/ml) and linezolid (decrease, 0.9 log CFU/ml) in the animal model. Rifampin-resistant strains appeared in 60% of cases, whereas no linezolid resistance emerged. No daptomycin-resistant subpopulations were detected at frequencies of 10(-7) or higher. In conclusion, daptomycin at high doses proved to be as effective as rifampin, and the two were the most active therapies for this experimental foreign-body infection. These high doses ensured a profile of safety from the development of resistance.

Effect of oxazolidinone, RBx 7644 (ranbezolid), on inhibition of staphylococcal adherence to plastic surfaces

Adhesion to biomaterial is assumed to be a crucial step in the pathogenesis of foreign body infection. Slime producing Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus have emerged as a preeminent cause of nosocomial bacteremia and infections of prosthetic medical devices. We evaluated the time-dependent anti-adhesive effect of RBx 7644 (ranbezolid), vancomycin, linezolid and quinupristin/ dalfopristin on two isolates each of S. epidermidis and S. aureus. Linezolid and quinupristin/ dalfopristin showed inhibition only at supra-inhibitory concentrations (2 and 4X MIC) following 2 and 4 h delayed treatment, whereas RBx 7644 demonstrated significant activity against adhesion of staphylococcal cells that had been treated with 2 to 6 h delay. When vancomycin treatment was delayed by 4 to 6 h, even concentrations above the MIC were unable to prevent adherence. This study indicates that RBx 7644 has anti-adhesion potential and may emerge as an important antibiotic for prevention and treatment of device-related infections caused by staphylococci.

Strategies for managing today's infections

Bacterial infections are becoming more difficult to treat. At the present time c. 70% of nosocomial infections are resistant to at least one antimicrobial drug that previously was effective for the causative pathogen. Pathogens that are notorious for their virulence and ability to develop resistance include Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus spp., members of the Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter species. Notable resistance patterns that have emerged include methicillin resistance in S. aureus, which started in the healthcare setting but has now moved into the community. Vancomycin resistance in enterococci is frequently seen, and vancomycin resistance in methicillin-resistant S. aureus is a public health threat. Resistance patterns seen in pseudomonal and Acinetobacter infections are rapidly shifting. The situation has become sufficiently serious for clinical opinion leaders to call upon governments for assistance in addressing the problem. In this worsening environment, in which patients are at progressively greater risk of untreatable infections, clear recommendations for prescribers are urgently needed. Severity of infection and underlying conditions are key issues, as patients with the most serious diseases are those in most urgent need, and improvements in our ability to predict likely infecting pathogens when empirical therapy is necessary are needed. Risk-factors and local resistance patterns must be accounted for, and initial empirical therapy should be adequately broad spectrum and adequately dosed. Agents must be highly active, able to penetrate adequately to the site of infection, safe, and well-tolerated.

Perspectives on Daptomycin Resistance, with Emphasis on Resistance in Staphylococcus aureus

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections are becoming more frequent and less easily treated by means of currently recommended agents. Vancomycin has been associated with decreased susceptibility in staphylococci and with treatment failures. Daptomycin is rapidly bactericidal; a dosage of 4 mg/kg daily is approved for treatment of skin and soft-tissue infections, and a dosage of 6 mg/kg daily is approved for treatment of patients with S. aureus bacteremia and right-sided endocarditis. Findings of in vitro studies suggest a correlation between the minimum inhibitory concentrations of daptomycin and vancomycin. Clinical failure was associated with increasing minimum inhibitory concentrations in case reports and in a randomized study of persons with S. aureus bacteremia and endocarditis. Patients who did not respond to therapy had deep-seated infections that required but could not be or were not managed with adjunctive surgical therapy. No definitive resistance mechanism has been identified, although genetic mutations have been described. Clinically, prior vancomycin therapy has not been associated with failure of daptomycin therapy. Although clinical practitioners must monitor for daptomycin resistance, the available data support the use of daptomycin in the treatment of methicillin-resistant S. aureus bacteremia and endocarditis.