advertising
-
1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Diabetes data and trends: age-adjusted hospital discharge rates for peripheral arterial disease (PAD), ulcer/inflammation/infection (ULCER), or neuropathy as first-listed diagnosis per 1,000 diabetic population, United States, 1988–2007. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/print.do?url=http%3A//www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/hosplea/diabetes_complications/fig2_pop.htm. Published 2011. Updated March 2, 2012. Accessed December 13, 2012.
-
2.
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Diabetic foot problems: inpatient management of people with diabetic foot ulcers and infection. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG119. Published 2011. Accessed September 28, 2012.
-
3.
Prompers L, Huijberts M, Schaper N, et al: Resource utilisation and costs associated with the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: prospective data from the Eurodiale Study. Diabetologia 51: 1826, 2008.
-
4.
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research: Guidance for Industry: Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Developing Drugs for Treatment, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, 2013. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm071185.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed January 11, 2014.
-
5.
Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Cornia PB, et al: 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections. Clin Infect Dis 54: e132, 2012.
-
6.
Moran GJ, Krishnadasan A, Gorwitz RJ, et al: Methicillin-resistant S. aureus infections among patients in the emergency department. N Engl J Med 355: 666, 2006.
-
7.
Talan DA, Krishnadasan A, Gorwitz RJ, et al: Comparison of Staphylococcus aureus from skin and soft-tissue infections in US emergency department patients, 2004 and 2008. Clin Infect Dis 53: 144, 2011.
-
8.
Kairam N, Silverman ME, Salo DF, et al: Cutaneous methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a suburban community hospital pediatric emergency department. J Emerg Med 41: 460, 2011.
-
9.
Richter SS, Heilmann KP, Dohrn CL, et al: Activity of ceftaroline and epidemiologic trends in Staphylococcus aureus isolates collected from 43 medical centers in the United States in 2009. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55: 4154, 2011.
-
10.
Noel GJ, Bush K, Bagchi P, et al: A randomized, double-blind trial comparing ceftobiprole medocaril with vancomycin plus ceftazidime for the treatment of patients with complicated skin and skin-structure infections. Clin Infect Dis 46: 647, 2008.
-
11.
Vick-Fragoso R, Hernandez-Oliva G, Cruz-Alcazar J, et al: Efficacy and safety of sequential intravenous/oral moxifloxacin vs intravenous/oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for complicated skin and skin structure infections. Infection 37: 407, 2009.
-
12.
Esposito S, Leone S, Noviello S, et al: Foot infections in diabetes (DFIs) in the out-patient setting: an Italian multicentre observational survey. Diabet Med 25: 979, 2008.
-
13.
Itani KM, Dryden MS, Bhattacharyya H, et al: Efficacy and safety of linezolid versus vancomycin for the treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections proven to be caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Am J Surg 199: 804, 2010.
-
14.
Lipsky BA, Stoutenburgh U: Daptomycin for treating infected diabetic foot ulcers: evidence from a randomized, controlled trial comparing daptomycin with vancomycin or semi-synthetic penicillins for complicated skin and skin-structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 55: 240, 2005.
-
15.
Wang G, Hindler JF, Ward KW, et al: Increased vancomycin MICs for Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates from a university hospital during a 5-year period. J Clin Microbiol 44: 3883, 2006.
-
16.
Steinkraus G, White R, Friedrich L: Vancomycin MIC creep in non-vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA), vancomycin-susceptible clinical methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) blood isolates from 2001-05. J Antimicrob Chemother 60: 788, 2007.
-
17.
Rhee KY, Gardiner DF, Charles M: Decreasing in vitro susceptibility of clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolates to vancomycin at the New York Hospital: quantitative testing redux. Clin Infect Dis 40: 1705, 2005.
-
18.
Logman JF, Stephens J, Heeg B, et al: Comparative effectiveness of antibiotics for the treatment of MRSA complicated skin and soft tissue infections. Curr Med Res Opin 26: 1565, 2010.
-
19.
Rolston KV, Segreti J, Lamp KC, et al: Cubicin Outcomes Registry and Experience (CORE) methodology. Am J Med 120 (suppl 1): S4, 2007.
-
20.
Wang SH, Sun ZL, Guo YJ, et al: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from foot ulcers in diabetic patients in a Chinese care hospital: risk factors for infection and prevalence. J Med Microbiol 59 (pt 10): 1219, 2010.
-
21.
Tentolouris N, Petrikkos G, Vallianou N, et al: Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in infected and uninfected diabetic foot ulcers. Clin Microbiol Infect 12: 186, 2006.
-
22.
Yates C, May K, Hale T, et al: Wound chronicity, inpatient care, and chronic kidney disease predispose to MRSA infection in diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care 32: 1907, 2009.
-
23.
Lipsky BA, Peters EJG, Senneville E, et al: Expert opinion on the management of infections in the diabetic foot. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 28 (suppl 1): 163, 2012.
-
24.
Blanes JI; Representatives of Spanish Society of Surgeons (ACS); Representatives of Spanish Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SEACV); Representatives of Spanish Society of Emergency Medicine (SEMES); Spanish Internal Medicine Society (SEMI); Representatives of Spanish Society of Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC); Representatives of Spanish Society of Chemotherapy (SEQ): Consensus document on treatment of infections in diabetic foot. Rev Esp Quimioter 24: 233, 2011.
-
25.
Itani KM, Akhras KS, Stellhorn R, et al: Outcomes associated with initial versus later vancomycin use in patients with complicated skin and skin-structure infections. Pharmacoeconomics 27: 421, 2009.
-
26.
Gonzalez-Ruiz A, Beiras-Fernandez A, Lehmkuhl H, et al: Clinical experience with daptomycin in Europe: the first 2.5 years. J Antimicrob Chemother 66: 912, 2011.
-
27.
Wu SC, Driver VR, Wrobel JS, et al: Foot ulcers in the diabetic patient, prevention and treatment. Vasc Health Risk Manag 3: 65, 2007.
-
28.
Kim A, Suecof LA, Sutherland CA, et al: In vivo microdialysis study of the penetration of daptomycin into soft tissues in diabetic versus healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52: 3941, 2008.
-
29.
Cubicin [prescribing information], Cubist Pharmaceuticals Inc, Lexington, MA, 2010.
Daptomycin for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Diabetic Foot Infections
Search for other papers by Warren S. Joseph in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Thomas Quast in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Alberto Cogo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Monica G. Crompton in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Min Jung Yoon in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Kenneth C. Lamp in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Darren Culshaw in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ricardo L. Chaves in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background
Diabetic foot infection (DFI) is a serious, difficult-to-treat infection, especially when caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Vancomycin has been the standard treatment for MRSA infection, but lower response rates in MRSA skin infections have been reported. This analysis assessed the outcome and safety of daptomycin therapy in patients with a DFI caused by MRSA.
Methods
Using the Cubicin Outcomes Registry and Experience and the European Cubicin Outcomes Registry and Experience (2006–2009), 79 patients with MRSA DFI were identified and included in this analysis.
Results
In the 74 evaluable patients, daptomycin was administered at a median dose of 4.8 mg/kg primarily every 24 hours (85.1%) and for a median of 15.0 days. Overall, 77.0% of the patients (57 of 74) received initial therapy with activity against MRSA; however, of patients receiving daptomycin as second-line therapy (n = 31), only 45.2% were treated with an antibiotic agent active against MRSA. The overall clinical success and treatment failure rates were 89.2% and 10.8%, respectively. Success with daptomycin therapy was higher in patients who had surgery and in those whose initial therapy was daptomycin. Eleven patients had 14 adverse events, two of which were possibly related to daptomycin use and led to discontinuation.
Conclusions
In a large real-world cohort of patients with MRSA DFI, daptomycin therapy was shown to be generally well tolerated and effective. The use of an anti-MRSA antibiotic agent should be considered when implementing first-line antibiotic drug therapy for DFI in countries where MRSA is common to avoid inappropriate empirical treatment and potential negative effects on outcomes.
advertising
advertising
