Efficacy Of Tigecycline In Treatment Research Articles

Observation of the clinical efficacy of tigecycline for treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill elderly patients

To evaluate the efficacy of tigecycline for treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill elderly patients. Data of critically ill elderly patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia treated with tigecycline in the intensive care unit was collected from June 2011 to March 2014 in this retrospective study, to evaluated the clinical efficacy of tigecycline. A total of 79 patients (83.5% male) were included, the mean age was 84 years old (rang, 65 years to 100 years old). Acinetobacter baumannii (39.1%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (35.0%) and Klebsiella pneumonia (23.8%) were the most common pathogens.All patients were treated with tigecycline, 54.4% combined with other antimicrobial agents, 35.4% treated with double dose of tigecycline, and the mean course of antibiotic treatment was 9 days (range, 2 days to 22 days). After treatment, clinical success were recorded in 44 patients (55.7%), clinical failure were recorded in 29 patients, clinical uncertainty were recorded in 6 patients.28 days after treatment, patients' overall mortality was 39.0%.The clinical success rates were associated with acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) Ⅱ score less than 15 (the clinical success rates were 72.2% and 41.9% in patients with APACHE Ⅱ score<15 and APACHE Ⅱ score≥15, respectively; P=0.007); treated with double dose of tigecycline (71.4% vs 47.1%, P=0.037) or combination regimens were also had significant difference (67.4% vs 41.7%, P=0.022). Treatment of tigecycline combined with other antimicrobial agents and double dose of tigecycline may both can improve clinical efficacy in critically ill elderly patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Tigecycline in treatment of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacillus urinary tract infections: a systematic review.

To review cases of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacillus urinary tract infections (UTIs) treated with tigecycline and the literature related to this subject. We performed a systematic review of the literature identifying patients with MDR Gram-negative bacillus UTIs treated with tigecycline. Fourteen cases describing treatment of UTIs caused by MDR Gram-negative bacilli with tigecycline are reviewed. Favourable clinical outcomes were noted in 11 of 14 cases. An initial favourable microbiological outcome was noted in 12 cases. Post-treatment cultures in two cases were positive for tigecycline-resistant organisms. The clinical efficacy of tigecycline for treatment of UTIs has not been extensively evaluated. Based on the available literature, tigecycline appears to have efficacy in some patients with MDR Gram-negative bacillus UTIs. Further research in this area is needed to fully elucidate the role of tigecycline in treating such patients.

Prevention of Clostridium difficilespore formation by sub-inhibitory concentrations of tigecycline and piperacillin/tazobactam

BackgroundSporulation of Clostridium difficile during infection and persistence of spores within the gut could partly explain treatment failures and recurrence. However, the influence of antibiotics on sporulation is unclear. The objective of our study was to evaluate the impact of ciprofloxacin, metronidazole, piperacillin/tazobactam, tigecycline, and vancomycin on C. difficile sporulation in vitro.MethodsThe reference strains ATCC 9689, 630, VPI 10463, and seven other clinical isolates of C. difficile were used, including three epidemic NAP1/027 isolates. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) were determined and sporulation was assessed after growth in the absence or presence of ≤0.5x MIC concentrations of each antibiotic.ResultsAll strains were sensitive to the antibiotics tested, except ribotype 027 isolates that were resistant to ciprofloxacin (MIC = 128 mg/L). Metronidazole and vancomycin generally did not significantly affect spore production in C. difficile, although vancomycin slightly affected sporulation of a few isolates. Ciprofloxacin inhibited sporulation of ribotype 027 isolates mainly. Interestingly, sub-MIC concentrations of piperacillin/tazobactam reduced spore formation in several isolates. However, the most striking observation was made with tigecycline, with an important reduction of spore formation in most isolates.ConclusionsThe capacity of C. difficile to sporulate can be significantly affected by certain antibiotics. The reduced sporulation observed with tigecycline and piperacillin/tazobactam might explain why these antibiotics are generally associated with lower risk of C. difficile infections. In addition, the inhibition of sporulation might partly explain the apparent efficacy of tigecycline for treatment of patients with recurrent infection.

Safety and Efficacy of Tigecycline in Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Results of a Double-blind Phase 3 Comparison Study With Vancomycin-Aztreonam

Safety and Efficacy of Tigecycline in Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Results of a Double-blind Phase 3 Comparison Study With Vancomycin-Aztreonam

Safety and Efficacy of Tigecycline in Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Results of a Double-Blind Phase 3 Comparison Study with Vancomycin-Aztreonam

In a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 546 patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections received tigecycline 100 mg/day (a 100-mg initial dose and then 50 mg intravenously twice daily) or the combination of vancomycin 2 g/day (1 g intravenously twice daily) and aztreonam 4 g/day (2 g intravenously twice daily) for up to 14 days. The primary end point was the clinical response in the clinical modified intent-to-treat (c-mITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations at the test-of-cure visit 12 to 92 days after the last dose. The microbiologic response at the test-of-cure visit was also assessed. Safety was assessed by physical examination, laboratory results, and adverse event reporting. Five hundred twenty patients were included in the c-mITT population (tigecycline group, n = 261; combination group, n = 259), and 436 were clinically evaluable (tigecycline group, n = 223; combination group, n = 213). The clinical responses in the tigecycline and the combination vancomycin and aztreonam groups were similar in the c-mITT population (84.3% versus 86.9%; difference, -2.6% [95% confidence interval, -9.0, 3.8]; P = 0.4755) and the CE population (89.7% versus 94.4%; difference, -4.7% [95% confidence interval, -10.2, 0.8]; P = 0.1015). Microbiologic eradication (documented or presumed) occurred in 84.8% of the patients receiving tigecycline and 93.2% of the patients receiving vancomycin and aztreonam (difference, -8.5 [95% confidence interval, -16.0, -1.0]; P = 0.0243). The numbers of patients reporting adverse events were similar in the two groups, with increased nausea and vomiting rates in the tigecycline group and an increased incidence of rash and increases in alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels in the combination vancomycin and aztreonam group. Tigecycline was shown to be safe and effective for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.