Abstract
Current data on the frequency and efficacy of linezolid (LNZ) in infective endocarditis (IE) are based on small retrospective series. We used a national database to evaluate the effectiveness of LNZ in IE.
This is a retrospective study of IE patients in the Spanish GAMES database who received LNZ. We defined 3 levels of therapeutic impact: LNZ < 7 days, LNZ high-impact (≥ 7 days, > 50% of the total treatment, and > 50% of the LNZ doses prescribed in the first weeks of treatment), and LNZ ≥ 7 days not fulfilling the high-impact criteria (LNZ-NHI). Effectiveness of LNZ was assessed using propensity score matching and multivariate analysis of high-impact cases in comparison to patients not treated with LNZ from the GAMES database matched for age-adjusted comorbidity Charlson index, heart failure, renal failure, prosthetic and intracardiac IE device, left-sided IE, and Staphylococcus aureus. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included IE complications and relapses.
From 3467 patients included in the GAMES database, 295 (8.5%) received LNZ. After excluding 3 patients, 292 were grouped as follows for the analyses: 99 (33.9%) patients in LNZ < 7 days, 11 (3.7%) in LNZ high-impact, and 178 (61%) in LNZ-NHI. In-hospital mortality was 51.5%, 54.4%, and 19.1% respectively. In the propensity analysis, LNZ high-impact group presented with respect to matched controls not treated with LNZ higher in-hospital mortality (54.5% vs 18.2%, P = .04). The multivariate analysis showed an independent relationship of LNZ use with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 9.06, 95% confidence interval 1.15--71.08, P = .03).
Treatment with LNZ is relatively frequent, but most cases do not fulfill our high-impact criteria. Our data suggest that the use of LNZ as definitive treatment in IE may be associated with higher in-hospital mortality.
Keywords: Enterococcus, infective endocarditis, linezolid, mortality, Staphylococcus
1. Introduction
Infective endocarditis (IE) remains a serious disease with significant morbidity and mortality.[1,2] The most common microorganisms involved in this pathology are gram-positive bacteria,[3,4] and in recent years, there has been an increase in the incidence of resistant strains, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci.[5]
Linezolid (LNZ), the first oxazolidinone antimicrobial, has excellent activity against gram-positive bacteria.[6] It has high bioavailability and excellent tissue penetration and is currently used as a first-line treatment for nosocomial pneumonia and skin and soft tissue infections.[7,8] However, its bacteriostatic action limits the indications for IE. Current guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommend LNZ only as an alternative therapeutic regimen for MRSA and Enterococcus spp. resistant to beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, and vancomycin,[9] while the American Heart Association (AHA) does not suggest the use of LNZ for the treatment of MRSA-related infections.[10]
Clinical efficacy studies of LNZ on IE are scarce and limited to isolated cases or small series where LNZ was administered as part of a multidrug regimen. Results from the recent Partial Oral Treatment of Endocarditis (POET) trial, regarded LNZ as one of the optimal drugs for oral consolidation therapy in IE.[11] Thus, it is necessary to assess the real use of LNZ and clarify its role in the treatment of IE.
We assessed the real use of LNZ in the Spanish National Endocarditis Database (GAMES) that includes more than 3000 prospectively collected episodes. We structured LNZ use in 3 levels of therapeutic impact. The aim of this study was to determine the use of LNZ in IE and assess the outcome in patients receiving LNZ for IE treatment.
2. Methods
2.1. Design of the study
A retrospective analysis of patients from 34 Spanish hospitals registered in the GAMES database between 2008 and 2016. The characteristics and procedures of the GAMES database are published elsewhere.[5] For the study, we prospectively included patients with IE episodes who were treated with LNZ regardless of when the treatment was initiated and/or its duration.
2.2. Treatment with linezolid
To assess the effect of LNZ treatment on IE, we defined 3 levels of therapeutic impact: administration of LNZ for less than 7 days (LNZ < 7 days): group of patients who received LNZ not more than 6 days at any time during IE therapy and in any pharmacological combination; LNZ high-impact: group of patients who received LNZ for 7 or more days, LNZ accounted for at least 50% of total IE treatment, at least 50% as monotherapy, and at least 50% of total dose was received in the first half of IE course of treatment; LNZ not fulfilling criteria of high impact (LNZ-NHI): group of patients who received LNZ for 7 or more days but who did not meet all of high-impact criteria.
2.3. Other definitions
Infective endocarditis (IE): based on the modified Duke criteria.[12]
Community-acquired IE: diagnosed within 48 hours of hospital admission and does not meet the criteria for nosocomial IE or healthcare-associated IE.
Nosocomial IE: develops after 72 hours of admission or associated with an invasive procedure performed during recent hospitalization.[13,14]
Date of diagnosis: the first day of positive blood cultures or day at which the first echocardiogram findings compatible with IE are available in cases for which there are no positive blood cultures.
Persistent bacteremia: positive blood cultures with the same microorganism after seven days, despite appropriate antimicrobial treatment.
Septic shock: based on the criteria by the International Sepsis Definitions Conference.[15]
Central nervous system involvement: presence of acute neurological deficit of ischemic or hemorrhagic origin evidenced during the course of IE.
Hematological toxicity: presence of drug-related anemia, neutropenia, or thrombocytopenia, or a combination of the previous manifestations.
2.4. Objectives
The primary objectives of this study were to test in-hospital and 1-year mortality among patients who received LNZ versus subjects who did not receive LNZ; secondary objectives were to evaluate frequency of use and complications associated to IE therapy, and to document in-hospital stay and recurrences.
2.5. Analysis
Descriptive analysis including baseline, clinical, and event-related variables. Comparisons between patients who underwent treatment with LNZ against those who did not, and between the 3 impact groups were carried out. To assess the effectiveness of LNZ on IE outcome, propensity score matching (PS) for age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, heart failure, renal failure, prosthetic and intracardiac device-related IE, left-sided IE, and S. aureus, and a multivariate analysis of in-hospital mortality were performed and compared against matched control cases not receiving LNZ.
2.6. Statistical analysis
Quantitative variables are expressed as means and standard deviations (SD) or medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), as appropriate; qualitative variables are presented as frequencies and percentages. Univariate analyses for intergroup comparisons in normally distributed continuous variables were carried out using Student t-test, and in non-normal distributions, the Mann–Whitney test was applied. Categorical variables were compared using the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test when the χ2 test could not be used. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were computed using logistic regression analysis. For PSM analysis, logistic regression was ran with a 1:3 case–control ratio. Stepwise logistic regression analysis included variables present at the time of admission with a P-value < .05 in the univariate analysis or were clinically relevant. All statistical analyses were performed using the PASW Statistics 18 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
2.7. Ethical issues
The project was approved by national and local institutional review boards and ethics committees (EC 18/07).
3. Results
3.1. Population
From a cohort of 3467 patients with IE included in the GAMES database between 2008 and 2016, 295 (8.5%) had received LNZ (Table 1). Median age was 69 years (IQR 58–76) and 63.4% were male. Most cases had left-sided IE (67.1%) and native-valve IE (49.2%). The most frequent microorganisms identified were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) and S. aureus. Prevalence of MRSA in our series was 35.7%.
Table 1.
Description of the 295 cases treated with LNZ and comparison with controls in the GAMES IE cohort.
| Variables (%) | LNZ 295 | Controls 3172 | P | 95% CI Lower-Upper |
| Age, median (IQR) | 69 (58 – 76) | 69 (57 – 77) | .98 | – |
| Sex (males) | 187 (63.4) | 1921 (60.5) | .37 | – |
| Comorbidities | ||||
| Ischemic heart disease | 79 (26.7) | 815 (25.6) | .74 | – |
| Heart failure | 131 (44.4) | 1020 (32.1) | <.01 | 1.68 (1.32–2.14) |
| Diabetes mellitus | 94 (31.9) | 870 (27.5) | .25 | – |
| Renal failure | 62 (21.0) | 473 (15.0) | .02 | 1.57 (1.22–2.03) |
| Previous IE | 23 (7.8) | 230 (7.3) | .78 | – |
| Charlson index (median, IQR) | 5 (3 – 7) | 5 (3 – 7) | .51 | – |
| Type of IE | ||||
| Aortic | 116 (39.3) | 1580 (49.8) | <.01 | 0.65 (0.51–0.83) |
| Mitral | 104 (35.3) | 1390 (43.8) | < .01 | 0.69 (0.54–0.89) |
| Tricuspid | 21 (7.1) | 163 (5.1) | .15 | – |
| Native | 145 (49.2) | 1965 (61.9) | <.01 | 0.59 (0.47–0.75) |
| Prosthetic | 4 (31.9) | 46 (29.8) | .45 | – |
| Non-valvular | 69 (23.4) | 358 (11.3) | <.01 | 2.39 (1.78–3.20) |
| Acquisition | ||||
| Community | 136 (47.6) | 1873 (61.5) | <.01 | 0.56 (0.44–.072) |
| Nosocomial | 126 (44.1) | 900 (29.6) | <.01 | 1.87 (1.46–2.39) |
| Healthcare-related | 24 (8.4) | 271 (8.9) | .77 | – |
| Etiology | ||||
| S. aureus | 84 (28.5) | 692 (21.8) | .01 | 1.42 (1.09–1.86) |
| Coagulase negative staphylococci | 88 (29.8) | 522 (16.5) | <.01 | 2.15 (1.65–2.81) |
| Enterococcus spp. | 36 (12.2) | 436 (13.7) | .46 | – |
| Streptococcus spp. | 34 (11.5) | 847 (26.7) | <.01 | 0.35 (0.24–0.56) |
| Complications | ||||
| Persistent bacteremia | 47 (15.9) | 349 (11.0) | .01 | 1.56 (1.12–2.18) |
| Central nervous system involvement | 49 (16.6) | 624 (19.6) | .23 | – |
| Renal failure | 139 (47.1) | 1108 (35.2) | <.01 | 1.63 (1.28–2.08) |
| Septic shock | 56 (18.9) | 364 (11.4) | <.01 | 1.79 (1.31–2.45) |
| Cardiac surgery | 146 (49.5) | 1414 (44.6) | .11 | – |
| Clinical course | ||||
| Median in-hospital stay (days, IQR) | 39 (27 – 61) | 36 (21 – 52) | <.01 | 1.01 (1.00–1.02) |
| Median duration of treatment for IE (days, IQR) | 42 (26 – 50) | 36 (25 – 44) | <.01 | 1.05 (1.02–1.08) |
| In-hospital mortality | 91 (30.8) | 856 (27.0) | .16 | – |
| One-year follow-up mortality | 12 (4.0) | 186 (5.8) | .25 | – |
| Recurrences | 6 (3.1) | 52 (2.4) | .73 | – |
Bold indicates not significant (NS).
Targeted LNZ treatment was used in 262 cases (88.8%) and empirical therapy in 33 (11.2%). In 81% of cases, LNZ was administered in combination with other antibiotics at some stage of treatment.
As for the outcome, 91 patients (30.8%) died during first hospital admission, 12 (4.0%) died within 1 year, and 6 cases relapsed (3.1%). Median in-hospital stay was 39 days (IQR 27–61), median duration of total IE treatment was 42 days (IQR 26–50), and median treatment with LNZ was 14 days (IQR 5–21). Adverse events attributable to LNZ were reported in 32 patients (10.8%), mostly hematological (25 patients, 78.1%).
3.2. Linezolid versus other therapies
Patients who received LNZ (295) showed significantly higher occurrence of heart failure, renal failure, and nosocomial acquisitioning in comparison to the rest of cases in the GAMES cohort (3172). On the contrary, LNZ-treated individuals had less previous valvular disease and developed less left-sided IE, and native-valve IE. Regarding complications, in the LNZ cohort, more frequent persistent bacteremia, impairment of renal function, and SS were found, as well as longer in-hospital stay (Table 1).
3.3. Therapeutic impact of linezolid
We excluded 3 cases with insufficient data regarding duration of LNZ treatment (Table 2). The 292 cases included in this analysis were distributed as follows:
Table 2.
Descriptive and comparative analysis of the 3 levels of therapeutic impact.
| Variable | LNZ < 7 days (n = 99) | LNZ-NHI (n = 178) | LNZ High-impact (n = 11) | P | 95% CI Lower-Upper |
| Age, median (IQR) | 70 (63–77) | 68 (55–76) | 59 (55–78) | NS | – |
| Sex (males) | 55 (55.6) | 120 (67.4) | 7 (63.6) | NS | – |
| Comorbidities | |||||
| Ischemic heart disease | 29 (29.3) | 46 (25.8) | 2 (18.2) | NS | – |
| Heart failure | 46 (46.5) | 76 (42.7) | 4 (36.4) | NS | – |
| Renal failure | 38 (38.4) | 55 (30.9) | 5 (45.5) | NS | – |
| Charlson index (median, IQR) | 5 (3 - 8) | 4 (2 - 6) | 5 (2 – 7) | .042 ∗ | 1.09 (1.01–1.31) |
| Type IE | |||||
| Aortic | 42 (42.4) | 67 (37.6) | 3 (27.3) | NS | – |
| Mitral | 39 (39.4) | 60 (33.7) | 5 (45.5) | NS | – |
| Tricuspid | 3 (3.0) | 15 (8.4) | 3 (27.3) | .012 † | 12.00 (2.07–69.42) |
| Native | 51 (51.5) | 84 (47.2) | 6 (54.5) | NS | – |
| Prosthetic | 33 (33.3) | 55 (30.9) | 4 (36.4) | NS | – |
| Intracardiac-device | 14 (14.1) | 41 (23.0) | 2 (18.2) | NS | – |
| Acquisition | |||||
| Community | 48 (48.5) | 81 (45.5) | 3 (27.3) | NS | – |
| Nosocomial | 39 (39.4) | 80 (44.9) | 7 (63.6) | NS | – |
| Health care related | 9 (9.1) | 12 (6.7) | 1 (9.1) | NS | – |
| Etiology | |||||
| S. aureus | 33 (33.3) | 46 (25.8) | 5 (45.5) | NS | – |
| Coagulase negative staphylococci | 23 (23.2) | 60 (33.7) | 5 (45.5) | NS | – |
| Enterococcus spp. | 9 (9.1) | 25 (14.0) | 0 | NS | – |
| Streptococcus spp. | 13 (13.1) | 19 (10.7) | 1 (9.1) | NS | – |
| Complications | |||||
| Persistent bacteremia | 15 (15.2) | 30 (16.9) | 2 (18.2) | NS | – |
| Central nervous system involvement | 19 (19.2) | 30 (16.9) | 0 | NS | – |
| Renal failure | 55 (55.6) | 77 (43.3) | 4 (36.4) | NS | – |
| Septic shock | 27 (27.3) | 26 (14.6) | 2 (18.2) | .016∗ | 0.46 (0.25–0.84) |
| Cardiac surgery | 42 (42.4) | 94 (52.8) | 4 (36.4) | NS | – |
| Clinical course | |||||
| In-hospital mortality | 51 (51.5) | 34 (19.1) | 6 (54.5) | < .01 ∗ , ‡ | 0.22 (0.12–0.38) |
| One-year follow-up mortality | 2 (2.0) | 10 (5.6) | 0 | NS | – |
| Median duration of treatment for IE (days, IQR) | 26 (13 - 42) | 45 (32 - 56) | 34 (19 – 46) | <.01 ∗ , ‡ | 1.06 (1.04–1.08) |
| Median duration of LNZ (days, IQR) | 4 (2 - 6) | 16 (13 - 25) | 27 (17 – 38) | <.01 ∗ , † , ‡ | 1.96 (1.62–2.37) |
| Interval from the diagnosis of IE to first LNZ (days, IQR) | 2 (0 - 19) | 25 (5 - 41) | 5 (0 – 17) | .01 ∗ , ‡ | 1.01 (1.00–1.02) |
NS = non significant.
Significant difference between LNZ < 7 days and LNZ-NHI.
Significant difference between LNZ < 7 days and LNZ high-impact.
significant difference between LNZ-NHI and LNZ high-impact.
-
(1)
LNZ < 7 days: 99 patients (33.9%). Median age 70 was years (IQR 63–77); 55.6% male. The age-adjusted Charlson index was 5 (IQR 3–8). As for the type of IE, 81.8% of the cases were left-sided and 51.5% were native-valve. The most frequent identified microorganism was S. aureus (33 cases; 33.3%). Median duration of complete IE treatment was 26 days (IQR 13–42) and median duration of LNZ treatment was 4 days (IQR 2–6). In-hospital mortality for this group was 51.5% and mortality during the follow-up year was 2.0%.
-
(2)
LNZ high impact: Fifteen patients met the high-impact criteria, but there were no data on IE etiology for 4 cases and were excluded; thus, the analysis was carried out on 11 cases (Table 3). Median age was 59 years (IQR 55–78); 63.6% were male. The most frequent comorbidities were renal failure (45.5%) and heart failure (36.4%). The age-adjusted Charlson index was 5 (IQR 2–7) and 72.8% were left-sided IE. There was higher frequency of tricuspid involvement (27.3%) in comparison to the other 2 groups. Acquisition was mainly nosocomial (63.6%), and the most frequent isolated microorganisms were S. aureus and CoNS (45.5% each). The main reasons for LNZ administration were renal failure (6 cases [5 chronic renal failures and 1 acute renal failure]), empiric treatment (1 case), and intolerance to vancomycin (1 case); in 3 cases, the reasons for choosing LNZ were unclear. Median duration of complete IE treatment for this group was 34 days (IQR 19–46). The duration of treatment with LNZ was 27 days (IQR 17–38) and median number of days before receiving the first dose of LNZ after the diagnosis was 5 days (IQR 0–17). The most frequent complications were renal failure (36.4%), SS (18.2%), and persistent bacteremia (18.2%). Four patients (36.4%) underwent cardiac surgery. In-hospital mortality was 54.5% (6 cases). The causes of death were septic shock (3 cases), heart failure (1 case), renal failure (1 case), and respiratory failure (1 case). There were no deaths and 1 recurrence during follow-up.
-
(3)
LNZ-NHI: One hundred seventy-eight patients (61%). Median age was 68 years (IQR 55–76); age-adjusted Charlson index was 4 (IQR 2–6). Most were left-sided IE (71.3%) and the most frequent etiology was CoNS (33.7%). Median time to first LNZ administration from IE diagnosis was 25 days (IQR 5–41). Median duration of complete treatment was 45 days (IQR 32–56) and for LNZ 16 days (IQR 13–25). In-hospital mortality was 19.1% (34 patients), and after 1 year of follow-up, 10 patients died (5.6%). This group presented significantly lower mortality and longer duration of complete IE treatment than the other two groups. In addition, the interval between IE diagnosis and the administration of the first dose of LNZ was significantly longer in comparison to LNZ < 7 days and LNZ high-impact.
Table 3.
Detailed description of the 11 cases included in the high-impact group.
| Case | Age (years) | Sex | Comorbidities | Type of IE | Etiology | Indication for LNZ | Duration of LNZ, days | Another antibiotic, days | Complications | CSx | In-hospital mortality | Cause of death |
| 1 | 17 | F | Neoplasm, hepatic failure | Tric N | S. aureus | UN | 65 | VAN 7 Other 5 | No | No | No | |
| 2 | 80 | F | Lung disease, previous stroke, RF | Aortic P | CoNS | Previous RF | 29 | CTX 3 VAN 2 | No | No | No | |
| 3 | 59 | M | DM, neoplasm, IS, RF, HF | Aortic and Mi P and N | CoNS | Previous RF | 18 | DAP 11 Other 6 | No | No | Yes | HF |
| 4 | 93 | M | RF | PM | S. aureus | Previous RF | 29 | CLOX 28 | No | Yes | Yes | RF |
| 5 | 55 | M | Mitral N | CoNS | New RF | 45 | Other 8 DAP 16 | RI, PB, septic shock | Yes | Yes | Septic shock | |
| 6 | 67 | M | DM, lung disease, neoplasm | Tric N | CoNS | Allergic reaction to VAN | 24 | VAN 5 | No | No | No | |
| 7 | 69 | M | Lung disease, neoplasm | Mitral N | S. aureus | UN | 15 | No | No | No | Yes | Resp. failure |
| 8 | 78 | F | DM, HF, RF, previous stroke | Tric N | S. aureus | Previous RF | 17 | DAP 9 | Septic shock, PB | No | Yes | Septic shock |
| 9 | 59 | F | Lung disease, HF | Aortic N | CoNS | UN | 19 | GEN 5 | Septic shock | Yes | Yes | Septic shock |
| 10 | 59 | M | HF, AF | Mitral P | S. bovis | Empiric | 32 | No | No | Yes | No | |
| 11 | 30 | M | AF, RF | PM | S. aureus | Previous RF | 35 | GEN 13 | Recurrence | No | No |
AF = atrial fibrillation, CIP = ciprofloxacin, CLOX = cloxacillin, CoNS = coagulase-negative staphylococci, CSx = cardiac surgery, CTX = ceftriaxone, DAP = daptomycin, DM = diabetes mellitus, F = female, GEN = gentamicin, HF = heart failure, IS = immunosuppression, M = male, MF = multiorgan failure, N = native, P = prosthetic, PB = persistent bacteremia, PM = pacemaker, Resp failure = respiratory failure, RF = renal failure, Tric = tricuspid, UN = unknown, VAN = vancomycin.
3.4. High-impact group versus patients not treated with linezolid
To evaluate the real impact of LNZ treatment on IE, we performed a PSM analysis with a 1:3 ratio that included the high-impact group paired with controls not receiving LNZ from the GAMES database (Table 4). We excluded the other 2 groups from this analysis because it was difficult to assess the specific role of LNZ on the outcome. Variables used for matching were age, heart failure, renal failure, age-adjusted Charlson index, prosthetic IE, left-sided IE, intracardiac IE device, and S. aureus. Regarding the type of IE, only acquisition was different between the 2 groups, with a higher frequency of nosocomial origin in the high-impact group respect to controls (63.6% vs 24.2%, P = .04). In the primary outcome, patients treated with LNZ presented higher in-hospital mortality (54.5% vs 18.2%, P = .04).
Table 4.
Propensity score of high-impact group versus controls.
| Variable | LNZ High-impact (n = 11) | Controls (n = 33) | P | 95% CI Lower-Upper | ||
| Age, median (IQR) | 59 (55–78) | 62 (52–74) | .84 | – | ||
| Sex (males) | 7 (63.6) | 22 (66.6) | .85 | – | ||
| Comorbidities | ||||||
| Ischemic heart disease | 2 (18.2) | 14 (42.4) | .26 | – | ||
| Diabetes mellitus | 3 (27.3) | 5 (15.2) | .36 | – | ||
| Peripherical vascular disease | 2 (18.2) | 7 (21.2) | .82 | – | ||
| Neoplasia | 4 (36.4) | 5 (15.2) | .13 | – | ||
| Hepatic disease | 1 (9.1) | 1 (3.0) | .40 | – | ||
| Charlson index (median, IQR) | 5 (2–7) | 4 (1–7) | .47 | – | ||
| Type IE | ||||||
| Aortic | 3 (27.3) | 11 (33.3) | .70 | – | ||
| Mitral | 5 (45.5) | 9 (27.3) | .26 | – | ||
| Tricuspid | 3 (27.3) | 3 (9.1) | .12 | – | ||
| Pulmonary | 1 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | .73 | – | ||
| Acquisition | ||||||
| Community | 3 (27.3) | 22 (66.6) | .01 | 0.17 (0.03–0.78) | ||
| Nosocomial | 7 (63.6) | 8 (24.2) | .04 | 5.25 (1.21–22.7) | ||
| Healthcare related | 1 (9.1) | 2 (6.0) | .72 | – | ||
| Etiology | ||||||
| S. aureus | 5 (45.5) | 12 (36.4) | .59 | – | ||
| Coagulase negative staphylococci | 5 (45.5) | 5 (15.2) | .09 | – | ||
| Enterococcus spp. | 0 | 3 (9.1) | .56 | – | ||
| Streptococcus spp. | 1 (9.1) | 5 (15.2) | .61 | – | ||
| Complications | ||||||
| Persistent bacteremia | 2 (20.0) | 6 (18.2) | .89 | – | ||
| Central nervous system involvement | 0 | 8 (24.2) | .08 | – | ||
| Renal failure | 4 (36.4) | 13 (39.4) | .85 | – | ||
| Septic shock | 2 (18.2) | 4 (12.1) | .61 | – | ||
| Cardiac surgery | 4 (36.4) | 14 (42.4) | .72 | – | ||
| Evolution | ||||||
| In-hospital mortality | 6 (54.5) | 6 (18.2) | .04 | 5.40 (1.22–23.72) | ||
| One-year follow-up mortality | 0 | 1 (3.0) | .56 | – | ||
| Overall mortality | 6 (54.5) | 7 (21.2) | .05 | 4.45 (1.04–19.01) | ||
| Median duration of treatment for IE (days, IQR) | 34 (19 – 46) | 37 (28 – 43) | .58 | – | ||
| Median in-hospital stay (days, IQR) | 34 (27 – 57) | 32 (27 – 44) | .37 | – | ||
A multivariate analysis for in-hospital mortality (Table 5) was carried out including the variables prosthetic IE, left-sided IE, heart failure, S. aureus, age-adjusted Charlson index > 6, and treatment with LNZ. Factors independently associated with in-hospital mortality were age-adjusted Charlson index > 6 (OR 25.77, 95% CI 1.81--366.15, P = .01) and use of LNZ (OR 9.06, 95% CI 1.15--71.08, P = .03).
Table 5.
Multivariate analysis of in-hospital mortality (N = 44).
| Factor | OR | 95% CI | P |
| Prosthetic IE | 0.04 | 0.002–1.20 | .06 |
| Left-sided IE | 15.19 | 0.96–238.77 | .06 |
| Heart failure | 5.75 | 0.96–34.29 | .06 |
| S. aureus | 0.70 | 0.06–8.26 | .77 |
| Age-adjusted Charlson index > 6 | 25.77 | 1.81–366.15 | .01 |
| Linezolid | 9.06 | 1.15–71.08 | .03 |
4. Discussion
In this study, we determined that LNZ is given quite frequently for the management of IE. Eight point five per cent of 3467 IE patients in our series received LNZ, although only in 11 cases, the duration and contribution of the therapy can be considered a definitive IE treatment. In these cases, LNZ was significantly associated with higher in-hospital mortality.
In 2000, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved LNZ for the treatment of skin and soft-tissue infections and nosocomial pneumonia.[16] Its use for IE with animal models proved effective when the diseases was caused by S. aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci.[17,18] Discordant results have been reported on the effect of LNZ administration for the treatment of bloodstream infections. In 2 compassionate use studies, in which LNZ was administered to patients infected with gram-positive bacteremia, cure rates were 70% and 88%, respectively.[19,20] Despite these promising findings, a noninferiority clinical trial did not demonstrate the superiority of LNZ over vancomycin and was associated with an increased risk of mortality, thus precluding the approval of LNZ for the treatment of bacteremia.[21]
There is no consensus in existing IE guidelines regarding the use of LNZ. The ESC guidelines recommend as an alternative treatment for IE caused by MRSA and enterococci resistant to beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, and vancomycin, while the AHA guidelines do not preclude its/their use in MRSA-related IE.[9,10] Information regarding LNZ use is based on single-case reports or small retrospective series in which the time of initiation of LNZ, treatment duration, and combination with other drugs are not well structured.[22–30]
Until our study, the series of Lauridsen et al[28] had reported the largest number of IE cases treated with LNZ (38 cases). The authors retrospectively compared individuals who had received LNZ with a control group, and no significant differences in in-hospital mortality or at one year of follow-up were detected. Tascini et al[29] and Muñoz et al[30] reported similar results, that is, treatment of IE with LNZ was not associated with higher mortality rates. In these studies, the authors did not specify the time of initiation or duration of the LNZ therapy nor its effect on IE. More recently, the POET trial compared a consolidation phase with oral vs intravenous antibiotic IE treatment, with LNZ being one of the oral options in the consolidation phase. However, its use was not based on a delayed start and in combination with another active agent.[11]
In our study, comorbidities and IE complications are more frequently seen in patients who received LNZ in comparison to the rest of patients included in the GAMES database, which probably leads to the selection of a higher risk group for potentially poorer evolution. When we segregated LNZ cases into 3 levels of therapeutic impact, the proportional contribution of LNZ differs considerably. Only for the high-impact group, LNZ was a definitive treatment in IE. In this cohort, in-hospital mortality is higher than in controls, and as determined with the multivariate analysis, LNZ is an independent risk of mortality.
The retrospective design and small sample size are the main limitations of this study. Another limitation is the possibility of a selection bias in the LNZ group, characterized by a larger number of comorbidities, more IE complications, and higher frequency of nosocomial acquisition (particularly in high-impact patients) with respect to controls. The criteria applied for selecting the groups of therapeutic impact may have led to include cases with an increased mortality, reflected in significantly differences in the median duration of total IE treatment between LNZ < 7 days versus LNZ-NHI and LNZ high-impact versus LNZ-NHI. These variables may contribute to a poorer outcome in LNZ high-impact patients. The propensity score analysis treat to avoid the selection bias and the multivariate analysis demonstrates that LNZ use is an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality in IE.
Among the strengths of this study is the stratification of cases in therapeutic impact groups that offers a clarification on the LNZ in clinical practice. Finally, we propose definitions of therapeutic requirements that may be useful when evaluating antimicrobial effectiveness in a disease as complex as IE.
5. Conclusion
Treatment with LNZ is relatively frequent, but most cases do not fulfill our high-impact criteria. Our data suggest that the use of LNZ as definitive treatment of IE may be associated with higher in-hospital mortality.
Author contributions
Conceptualization: Patricia Muñoz, Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Data curation: Patricia Muñoz.
Formal analysis: Sofia de la Villa Martinez, Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Investigation: Patricia Muñoz, Sofia de la villa martinez, Karlos Reviejo Jaka, Francisco Arnaiz de las Revillas, Lorien Garcia Cuello, Carmen Hidalgo Tenorio, Maria Angeles Rodriguez Esteban, Isabel Antorrena, Laura Castelo Corral, Elisa Garcia-Vazquez, Javier de la Torre Lima, Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Methodology: Patricia Muñoz, Miguel Angel Goenaga, Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Supervision: Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Validation: Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Visualization: Carmen Hidalgo Tenorio.
Writing – original draft: Patricia Muñoz, Sofia de la villa martinez.
Writing – review & editing: Patricia Muñoz, Sofia de la villa martinez, Manuel Martinez-Selles, Emilio Bouza Santiago.
Footnotes
Abbreviations: AHA = American Heart Association, CoNS = coagulase-negative staphylococci, ESC = European Society of Cardiology, IE = infective endocarditis, IQR = interquartile ranges, LNZ = linezolid, LNZ-NHI = linezolid not not fulfilling the high-impact criteria, MRSA = methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, POET = Partial Oral Treatment of Endocarditis trial, PS = propensity score, VRE = vancomycin-resistant enterococci.
How to cite this article: Muñoz P, De la Villa S, Martínez-Sellés M, Goenaga M, Reviejo-Jaka K, Revillas FA, García-Cuello L, Hidalgo-Tenorio C, Rodríguez-Esteban M, Antorrena I, Castelo-Corral L, García-Vázquez E, De la Torre J, Bouza E, on behalf of the Spanish Collaboration on Endocarditis- Grupo de Apoyo al Manejo de la Endocarditis Infecciosa en España (GAMES). Linezolid for infective endocarditis: a structured approach based on a national database experience. Medicine. 2021;100:51(e27597).
Members of GAMES: Hospital Costa del Sol, (Marbella): Fernando Fernández Sánchez, José Mª García de Lomas, Gabriel Rosas, Javier de la Torre Lima; Hospital Universitario de Cruces, (Bilbao): Elena Bereciartua, María José Blanco Vidal, Roberto Blanco, María Victoria Boado, Marta Campaña Lázaro, Alejandro Crespo, Laura Guio Carrión, Mikel Del Álamo Martínez de Lagos, Gorane Euba Ugarte, Ane Josune Goikoetxea, Marta Ibarrola Hierro, José Ramón Iruretagoyena, Josu Irurzun Zuazabal, Leire López-Soria, Miguel Montejo, Javier Nieto, David Rodrigo, Regino Rodríguez, Yolanda Vitoria, Roberto Voces; Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria, (Málaga): Mª Victoria García López, Radka Ivanova Georgieva, Guillermo Ojeda, Isabel Rodríguez Bailón, Josefa Ruiz Morales; Hospital Universitario Donostia-Poliklínica Gipuzkoa-IIS Biodonostia, (San Sebastián): Harkaitz Azkune Galparsoro, Elisa Berritu Boronat, Mª Jesús Bustinduy Odriozola, Cristina del Bosque Martín, Tomás Echeverría, Alberto Eizaguirre Yarza, Ana Fuentes, Miguel Ángel Goenaga, Muskilda Goyeneche del Río, Ángela Granda Bauza, José Antonio Iribarren, Xabier Kortajarena Urkola, José Ignacio Pérez-Moreiras López, Ainhoa Rengel Jiménez, Karlos Reviejo, Alberto Sáez Berbejillo, Elou Sánchez Haza, Rosa Sebastián Alda, Itziar Solla Ruiz, Irati Unamuno Ugartemendia, Diego Vicente Anza, Iñaki Villanueva Benito, Mar Zabalo Arrieta; Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, (Alicante): Rafael Carrasco, Vicente Climent, Patricio Llamas, Esperanza Merino, Joaquín Plazas, Sergio Reus; Complejo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña, (A Coruña): Nemesio Álvarez, José María Bravo-Ferrer, Laura Castelo, José Cuenca, Pedro Llinares, Enrique Miguez Rey, María Rodríguez Mayo, Efrén Sánchez, Dolores Sousa Regueiro; Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Huelva, (Huelva): Francisco Javier Martínez; Hospital Universitario de Canarias, (Canarias): Mª del Mar Alonso, Beatriz Castro, Teresa Delgado Melian, Javier Fernández Sarabia, Dácil García Rosado, Julia González González, Juan Lacalzada, Lissete Lorenzo de la Peña, Alina Pérez Ramírez, Pablo Prada Arrondo, Fermín Rodríguez Moreno; Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, (Málaga): Antonio Plata Ciezar, José Mª Reguera Iglesias; Hospital Universitario Central Asturias, (Oviedo): Víctor Asensi Álvarez, Carlos Costas, Jesús de la Hera, Jonnathan Fernández Suárez, Lisardo Iglesias Fraile, Víctor León Arguero, José López Menéndez, Pilar Mencia Bajo, Carlos Morales, Alfonso Moreno Torrico, Carmen Palomo, Begoña Paya Martínez, Ángeles Rodríguez Esteban, Raquel Rodríguez García, Mauricio Telenti Asensio; Hospital Clínic-IDIBAPS, Universidad de Barcelona, (Barcelona): Manuel Almela, Juan Ambrosioni, Manuel Azqueta, Mercè Brunet, Marta Bodro, Ramón Cartañá, Carlos Falces, Guillermina Fita, David Fuster, Cristina García de la Mària, Delia García-Pares, Marta Hernández-Meneses, Jaume Llopis Pérez, Francesc Marco, José M. Miró, Asunción Moreno, David Nicolás, Salvador Ninot, Eduardo Quintana, Carlos Paré, Daniel Pereda, Juan M. Pericás, José L. Pomar, José Ramírez, Irene Rovira, Elena Sandoval, Marta Sitges, Dolors Soy, Adrián Téllez, José M. Tolosana, Bárbara Vidal, Jordi Vila; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, (Madrid): Iván Adán, Juan Carlos Alonso, Ana Álvarez-Uría, Javier Bermejo, Emilio Bouza, Gregorio Cuerpo Caballero, Antonia Delgado Montero, Ana González Mansilla, Mª Eugenia García Leoni, Esther Gargallo, Víctor González Ramallo, Martha Kestler Hernández, Amaia Mari Hualde, Marina Machado, Mercedes Marín, Manuel Martínez-Sellés, Patricia Muñoz, María Olmedo, Álvaro Pedraz, Blanca Pinilla, Ángel Pinto, Cristina Rincón, Hugo Rodríguez-Abella, Marta Rodríguez-Créixems, Antonio Segado, Neera Toledo, Maricela Valerio, Pilar Vázquez, Eduardo Verde Moreno; Hospital Universitario La Paz, (Madrid): Isabel Antorrena, Belén Loeches, Mar Moreno, Ulises Ramírez, Verónica Rial Bastón, María Romero, Sandra Rosillo; Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, (Santander): Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, (Santander): Jesús Agüero Balbín, Cristina Amado, Carlos Armiñanzas Castillo, Ana Arnaiz, Francisco Arnaiz de las Revillas, Manuel Cobo Belaustegui, María Carmen Fariñas, Concepción Fariñas-Álvarez, Marta Fernández Sampedro, Iván García, Claudia González Rico, Laura Gutierrez-Fernandez, Manuel Gutiérrez-Cuadra, José Gutiérrez Díez, Marcos Pajarón, José Antonio Parra, Ramón Teira, Jesús Zarauza; Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, (Madrid): Jorge Calderón Parra, Marta Cobo, Fernando Domínguez, Pablo García Pavía, Ana Fernández Cruz, Antonio Ramos-Martínez, Isabel Sánchez Romero; Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, (Madrid): Tomasa Centella, José Manuel Hermida, José Luis Moya, Pilar Martín-Dávila, Enrique Navas, Enrique Oliva, Alejandro del Río, Jorge Rodríguez-Roda Stuart, Soledad Ruiz; Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, (Granada): Carmen Hidalgo Tenorio; Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, (Sevilla): Manuel Almendro Delia, Omar Araji, José Miguel Barquero, Román Calvo Jambrina, Marina de Cueto, Juan Gálvez Acebal, Irene Méndez, Isabel Morales, Luis Eduardo López-Cortés; Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, (Sevilla): Arístides de Alarcón, Encarnación Gutiérrez-Carretero, José Antonio Lepe, José López-Haldón, Rafael Luque-Márquez, Guillermo Marín, Antonio Ortiz-Carrellán, Eladio Sánchez-Domínguez; Hospital San Pedro, (Logroño): Luis Javier Alonso, Pedro Azcárate, José Manuel Azcona Gutiérrez, José Ramón Blanco, Antonio Cabrera Villegas, Lara García-Álvarez, Concepción García García, José Antonio Oteo; Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, (Barcelona): Natividad de Benito, Mercé Gurguí, Cristina Pacho, Roser Pericas, Guillem Pons; Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, (A Coruña): M. Álvarez, A. L. Fernández, Amparo Martínez, A. Prieto, Benito Regueiro, E. Tijeira, Marino Vega; Hospital Santiago Apóstol, (Vitoria): Andrés Canut Blasco, José Cordo Mollar, Juan Carlos Gainzarain Arana, Oscar García Uriarte, Alejandro Martín López, Zuriñe Ortiz de Zárate, José Antonio Urturi Matos; Hospital SAS Línea de la Concepción, (Cádiz): Sánchez-Porto Antonio, Úbeda Iglesias Alejandro; Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca (Murcia): José Mª Arribas Leal, Elisa García Vázquez, Alicia Hernández Torres, Ana Blázquez, Gonzalo de la Morena Valenzuela; Hospital de Txagorritxu, (Vitoria): Ángel Alonso, Javier Aramburu, Felicitas Elena Calvo, Anai Moreno Rodríguez, Paola Tarabini-Castellani; Hospital Virgen de la Salud, (Toledo): Eva Heredero Gálvez, Carolina Maicas Bellido, José Largo Pau, Mª Antonia Sepúlveda, Pilar Toledano Sierra, Sadaf Zafar Iqbal-Mirza; Hospital Rafael Méndez, (Lorca-Murcia):, Eva Cascales Alcolea, Ivan Keituqwa Yañez, Julián Navarro Martínez, Ana Peláez Ballesta; Hospital Universitario San Cecilio (Granada): Eduardo Moreno Escobar, Alejandro Peña Monje, Valme Sánchez Cabrera, David Vinuesa García; Hospital Son Llátzer (Palma de Mallorca): María Arrizabalaga Asenjo, Carmen Cifuentes Luna, Juana Núñez Morcillo, Mª Cruz Pérez Seco, Aroa Villoslada Gelabert; Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet (Zaragoza): Carmen Aured Guallar, Nuria Fernández Abad, Pilar García Mangas, Marta Matamala Adell, Mª Pilar Palacián Ruiz, Juan Carlos Porres; Hospital General Universitario Santa Lucía (Cartagena): Begoña Alcaraz Vidal, Nazaret Cobos Trigueros, María Jesús Del Amor Espín, José Antonio Giner Caro, Roberto Jiménez Sánchez, Amaya Jimeno Almazán, Alejandro Ortín Freire, Monserrat Viqueira González; Hospital Universitario Son Espases (Palma de Mallorca): Pere Pericás Ramis, Mª Ángels Ribas Blanco, Enrique Ruiz de Gopegui Bordes, Laura Vidal Bonet; Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete (Albacete): Mª Carmen Bellón Munera, Elena Escribano Garaizabal, Antonia Tercero Martínez, Juan Carlos Segura Luque; Hospital Universitario Terrassa: Cristina Badía, Lucía Boix Palop, Mariona Xercavins, Sónia Ibars. Hospital Universitario Dr. Negrín (Gran Canaria): Xerach Bosch, Eloy Gómez Nebreda, Ibalia Horcajada Herrera, Irene Menduiña Gallego, Imanol Pulido; Complejo Hospitalario Universitario Insular Materno Infantil (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria): Héctor Marrero Santiago, Isabel de Miguel Martínez, Elena Pisos Álamo. Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre (Madrid): Eva Mª Aguilar Blanco, Mercedes Catalán González, María Angélica Corres Peiretti, Andrea Eixerés Esteve, Laura Domínguez Pérez, Santiago de Cossío Tejido, Francisco Galván Román, José Antonio García Robles, Francisco López Medrano, Mª Jesús López Gude, Mª Ángeles Orellana Miguel, Patrick Pilkington, Yolanda Revilla Ostalaza, Juan Ruiz Morales, Sebastián Ruiz Solís, Ana Sabín Collado, Marcos Sánchez Fernández, Javier Solera Rallo, Jorge Solís Martín. Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge (L’Hospitalet de Llobregat): Guillermo Cuervo, Francesc Escrihuela-Vidal, Jordi Carratalà, Inmaculada Grau, Sara Grillo, Carmen Ardanuy, Dámaris Berbel, José Carlos Sánchez Salado, Oriol Alegre, Alejandro Ruiz Majoral, Fabrizio Sbraga, Arnau Blasco, Laura Gracia Sánchez, Iván Sánchez-Rodríguez. Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz (Madrid): Beatriz Álvarez, Alfonso Cabello Úbeda, Ricardo Fernández Roblas, Miguel Ángel Navas Lobato, Ana María Pello. Hospital Basurto (Bilbao): Mireia de la Peña Triguero, Ruth Esther Figueroa Cerón, Lara Ruiz Gómez. Hospital del Mar (Barcelona): Mireia Ble, Juan Pablo Horcajada Gallego, Antonio José Ginel, Inmaculada López, Alexandra Mas, Antoni Mestres, Lluís Molina, Ramón Serrat, Núria Ribas, Francisca Sánchez, Ana Silverio, Marina Suárez, Luisa Sorlí, Lluís Recasens, Manuel Taurón.
The authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential.
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
- [1].Cuervo G, Escrihuela-Vidal F, Gudiol C, et al. Current challenges in the management of infective endocarditis. Front Med (Lausanne) 2021;8:641243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [2].Thuny F, Giorgi R, Habachi R, et al. Excess mortality and morbidity in patients surviving infective endocarditis. Am Heart J 2012;164:94–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [3].Munoz P, Kestler M, De Alarcon A, et al. Current epidemiology and outcome of infective endocarditis: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2015;94:e1816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [4].Cahill TJ, Baddour LM, Habib G, et al. Challenges in infective endocarditis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:325–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [5].Falcone M, Russo A, Venditti M. Optimizing antibiotic therapy of bacteremia and endocarditis due to staphylococci and enterococci: new insights and evidence from the literature. J Infect Chemother 2015;21:330–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [6].Gajdacs M. The continuing threat of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics (Basel) 2019;8: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [7].Leong HN, Kurup A, Tan MY, et al. Management of complicated skin and soft tissue infections with a special focus on the role of newer antibiotics. Infect Drug Resist 2018;11:1959–74. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [8].Torres A, Niederman MS, Chastre J, et al. International ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia: guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP)/ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) of the European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and Asociacion Latinoamericana del Torax (ALAT). Eur Respir J 2017;50:1700582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [9].Habib G, Lancellotti P, Antunes MJ, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis: the Task Force for the Management of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM). Eur Heart J 2015;36:3075–128. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [10].Baddour LM, Wilson WR, Bayer AS, et al. Infective endocarditis in adults: diagnosis, antimicrobial therapy, and management of complications: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2015;132:1435–86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [11].Iversen K, Ihlemann N, Gill SU, et al. Partial oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment of endocarditis. N Engl J Med 2019;380:415–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [12].Li JS, Sexton DJ, Mick N, et al. Proposed modifications to the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis 2000;30:633–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [13].Ortega-Loubon C, Munoz-Moreno MF, Andres-Garcia I, et al. Nosocomial vs community-acquired infective endocarditis in Spain: location, trends, clinical presentation, Etiology, and survival in the 21st century. J Clin Med 2019;8: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [14].Ambrosioni J, Hernandez-Meneses M, Tellez A, et al. The changing epidemiology of infective endocarditis in the twenty-first century. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2017;19:21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [15].Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016;315:801–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [16].Rodvold KA, McConeghy KW. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus therapy: past, present, and future. Clin Infect Dis 2014;58: (Suppl 1): S20–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [17].Patel R, Rouse MS, Piper KE, et al. Linezolid therapy of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium experimental endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001;45:621–3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [18].Oramas-Shirey MP, Buchanan LV, Dileto-Fang CL, et al. Efficacy of linezolid in a staphylococcal endocarditis rabbit model. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001;47:349–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [19].Birmingham MC, Rayner CR, Meagher AK, et al. Linezolid for the treatment of multidrug-resistant, gram-positive infections: experience from a compassionate-use program. Clin Infect Dis 2003;36:159–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [20].Jang HC, Kim SH, Kim KH, et al. Salvage treatment for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: efficacy of linezolid with or without carbapenem. Clin Infect Dis 2009;49:395–401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [21].Wilcox MH, Tack KJ, Bouza E, et al. Complicated skin and skin-structure infections and catheter-related bloodstream infections: noninferiority of linezolid in a phase 3 study. Clin Infect Dis 2009;48:203–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [22].Archuleta S, Murphy B, Keller MJ. Successful treatment of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium endocarditis with linezolid in a renal transplant recipient with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Transpl Infect Dis 2004;6:117–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [23].Balkhair A, Al Muharrmi Z, Darwish L, et al. Treatment of vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) endocarditis with linezolid. Int J Infect Dis 2010;14: (Suppl 3): e227–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [24].Bassetti M, Di Biagio A, Del Bono V, et al. Successful treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis with linezolid. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2004;24:83–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [25].de Feiter PW, Jacobs JA, Jacobs MJ, et al. Successful treatment of Staphylococcus epidermidis prosthetic valve endocarditis with linezolid after failure of treatment with oxacillin, gentamicin, rifampicin, vancomycin, and fusidic acid regimens. Scand J Infect Dis 2005;37:173–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [26].Jasovich A, Ganaha MC, Ebi C, et al. Endocarditis due to vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus raffinosus successfully treated with linezolid: case report and review of literature. Rev Argent Microbiol 2008;40:204–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [27].Wareham DW, Abbas H, Karcher AM, et al. Treatment of prosthetic valve infective endocarditis due to multi-resistant Gram-positive bacteria with linezolid. J Infect 2006;52:300–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [28].Lauridsen TK, Bruun LE, Rasmussen RV, et al. Linezolid as rescue treatment for left-sided infective endocarditis: an observational, retrospective, multicenter study. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2012;31:2567–74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [29].Tascini C, Bongiorni MG, Doria R, et al. Linezolid for endocarditis: a case series of 14 patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 2011;66:679–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [30].Munoz P, Rodriguez-Creixems M, Moreno M, et al. Linezolid therapy for infective endocarditis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2007;13:211–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]