Teicoplanin In Treatment Research Articles

Therapeutic drug monitoring of teicoplanin in a patient with bloodstream infection by Enterococcus faecium

Objective： To analyze the blood concentration，efficacy and adverse drug reactions（ADRs） of teicoplanin in treatment of bloodstream infection by Enterococcus faecium.Methods： Changes in physiological and pathological indexes of the patient were closely followed and recorded，and the treatment regimen was adjusted according to the results of therapeutic drug monitoring（TDM） of teicoplanin.Results： In the light of the results of therapeutic drug monitoring of teicoplanin，bloodstream infection was cured，pathogenic microorganism was effectively eliminated and no ADRs occurred.Conclusion： With TDM，teicoplanin could be safely and effectively used in the treatment of blood stream infection.

Comparative Evaluation of Linezolid and Teicoplanin in the Treatment of Ventilator-Associated MRSA Pneumonia: A Single-Center Experience

Background: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a serious infection in an intensive care unit (ICU). Ventilator-associated MRSA pneumonia (VAMP) in critically ill patients causes a high rate of mortality. Objectives: This study mainly aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and associated drug safety perspective of linezolid and teicoplanin in VAMP treatment. Methods: This retrospective study included 98 adult ICU patients with VAMP, where 42 patients (LZD group) and 56 patients (TPN group) received a standard dose of linezolid and teicoplanin, respectively, for their VAMP treatment. Adverse reactions associated with linezolid and teicoplanin were considered. Clinical outcomes and 30-day mortality rates were compared in both groups. Results: The LZD group showed a higher MRSA eradication rate (97%, n = 34) than the TPN group (94.3%, n = 53) (P = 0.034). The linezolid and teicoplanin therapy was suddenly discontinued in 19% and 5.3% of the patients in the LZD and TPN groups, respectively, before completing the full duration of antibiotic therapy due to developed adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including thrombocytopenia (LZD/TPN groups: 7/1 event), tachycardia (LZD group: 1 event), and nephrotoxicity (TPN group: 2 events). This discontinuation increased the total duration of antibiotic therapy in 19% (n = 42) and 5.3% (n = 56) of the patients (P = 0.034) in the LZD and TPN groups, respectively. Conclusions: VAMP is a life-threatening event in critically ill ICU patients worldwide. In this study, teicoplanin showed better clinical outcomes with a certain higher level of drug safety compared to linezolid in the treatment of ventilator-associated MRSA pneumonia.

Efficacy evaluation of teicoplanin and vancomycin in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus au-reus（MRSA） pneumonia

Objective To compare the safety and effectiveness of teicoplanin and vancomycin in treatment of MRSA pneumonia .Methods 68 cases of patients with MRSA pneumonia were divided into two groups by random numbers：the observation group of 34 cases with teicoplanin for treatment;the control group of 34 patients with the van-comycin for treatment .The clinical efficacy , bacteriological efficacy and adverse reactions for two groups were com-pared.Results the total efficiency for observation group and control group were 82.35%and 76.47%,respectively, and the total bacterial clearance rate were 91.18%and 85.29%,respectively.The clinical efficacy and bacteriologi-cal efficacy in observation group were slightly higher than that in control group （P>0.05）;observation group had ad-verse events of erythema ,rash and diarrhea for 1 patients each;the control group had adverse events of renal toxicity in four cases and ototoxicity ,phlebitis,diarrhea in 1 case,the total incidence of adverse reactions in observation group was slightly lower than that in the control group （P>0.05）.Conclusion Teicoplanin in treatment of MRSA pneumo-nia has good efficacy with lighter kidney damage ,which is similar to the vancomycin ,and it is worthy clinical promo-tion and application . Key words: Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus; Teicoplanin; Vancomycin

Poor efficacy of teicoplanin in treatment of deep-seated staphylococcal infections.

Teicoplanin in a 400 mg intravenous loading dose followed by 200 mg/day intravenously or intramuscularly was given to 19 patients with deep-seated staphylococcal infections. Only eight patients (44.4%) were considered cured, failure mostly being observed in patients with osteomyelitis, endocarditis and bacteremia. Poor tissue kinetics of teicoplanin and the presence of foreign bodies are probable explanations for the reported failures. Future trials using a higher dose of teicoplanin with or without the addition of rifampicin or gentamicin seem to be justified.