2019International Journal of Antimicrobial AgentsOpen access

Clinical outcomes following treatment of Enterobacter species pneumonia with piperacillin/tazobactam compared to cefepime or ertapenem

Maya R. Holsen, Lynn Wardlow, José A. Bazan, Lynn A. Fussner, Kelci Coe, Jessica L. Elefritz

Open full text 10 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Enterobacter spp. are a common cause of nosocomial pneumonia and treatment can be complicated by AmpC resistance. Carbapenems are the treatment of choice; however, alternatives are needed. Cefepime has been shown to be non-inferior to carbapenems. There are limited data to support the use of piperacillin/tazobactam. The objective of this study was to determine if piperacillin/tazobactam is non-inferior to cefepime or ertapenem for Enterobacter pneumonia treatment. OBJECTIVES: To compare the rate of clinical cure in patients with Enterobacter pneumonia receiving definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, or ertapenem. Secondary outcomes included hospital mortality, infection-related length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, recurrent pneumonia, and resistance. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center study. RESULTS: Of 114 patients included, 59 received definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam and 55 received cefepime or ertapenem. There was no difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical cure in the piperacillin/tazobactam group compared to the cefepime or ertapenem group (76.3% vs. 87.3%, P = 0.13). Treatment group was not associated with clinical cure when controlling for confounders in multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-2.37). The rate of recurrent pneumonia was 11.4% in the piperacillin/tazobactam group and 6.7% in the cefepime or ertapenem group (P = 0.48). Other secondary outcomes did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study of patients with Enterobacter pneumonia, clinical cure with piperacillin/tazobactam was comparable to that with cefepime or ertapenem; however, a prospective trial with a larger population is needed to determine if definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam is non-inferior to definitive treatment with cefepime or ertapenem.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Enterobacter spp. are a common cause of nosocomial pneumonia and treatment can be complicated by AmpC resistance. Carbapenems are the treatment of choice; however, alternatives are needed. Cefepime has been shown to be non-inferior to carbapenems. There are limited data to support the use of piperacillin/tazobactam. The objective of this study was to determine if piperacillin/tazobactam is non-inferior to cefepime or ertapenem for Enterobacter pneumonia treatment. OBJECTIVES: To compare the rate of clinical cure in patients with Enterobacter pneumonia receiving definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, or ertapenem. Secondary outcomes included hospital mortality, infection-related length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, recurrent pneumonia, and resistance. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center study. RESULTS: Of 114 patients included, 59 received definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam and 55 received cefepime or ertapenem. There was no difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical cure in the piperacillin/tazobactam group compared to the cefepime or ertapenem group (76.3% vs. 87.3%, P = 0.13). Treatment group was not associated with clinical cure when controlling for confounders in multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-2.37). The rate of recurrent pneumonia was 11.4% in the piperacillin/tazobactam group and 6.7% in the cefepime or ertapenem group (P = 0.48). Other secondary outcomes did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study of patients with Enterobacter pneumonia, clinical cure with piperacillin/tazobactam was comparable to that with cefepime or ertapenem; however, a prospective trial with a larger population is needed to determine if definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam is non-inferior to definitive treatment with cefepime or ertapenem.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Enterobacter spp. are a common cause of nosocomial pneumonia and treatment can be complicated by AmpC resistance. Carbapenems are the treatment of choice; however, alternatives are needed. Cefepime has been shown to be non-inferior to carbapenems. There are limited data to support the use of piperacillin/tazobactam. The objective of this study was to determine if piperacillin/tazobactam is non-inferior to cefepime or ertapenem for Enterobacter pneumonia treatment. OBJECTIVES: To compare the rate of clinical cure in patients with Enterobacter pneumonia receiving definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, or ertapenem. Secondary outcomes included hospital mortality, infection-related length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, recurrent pneumonia, and resistance. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center study. RESULTS: Of 114 patients included, 59 received definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam and 55 received cefepime or ertapenem. There was no difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical cure in the piperacillin/tazobactam group compared to the cefepime or ertapenem group (76.3% vs. 87.3%, P = 0.13). Treatment group was not associated with clinical cure when controlling for confounders in multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-2.37). The rate of recurrent pneumonia was 11.4% in the piperacillin/tazobactam group and 6.7% in the cefepime or ertapenem group (P = 0.48). Other secondary outcomes did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study of patients with Enterobacter pneumonia, clinical cure with piperacillin/tazobactam was comparable to that with cefepime or ertapenem; however, a prospective trial with a larger population is needed to determine if definitive treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam is non-inferior to definitive treatment with cefepime or ertapenem.

Key concepts: Cefepime, Ertapenem, Medicine, Tazobactam, Piperacillin/tazobactam, Piperacillin, Ventilator-associated pneumonia, Pneumonia

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Clinical outcomes following treatment of Enterobacter species pneumonia with piperacillin/tazobactam compared to cefepime or ertapenem — Research Paper | ScholarLens