AAC
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Greenberg, R N
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Greenberg, R N

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 December; 34(12): 2392-2397

Treatment of bone, joint, and vascular-access-associated gram-positive bacterial infections with teicoplanin.

R N Greenberg

Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40536.

ABSTRACT

Teicoplanin, a glycopeptide antibiotic, was evaluated for safety and efficacy in the treatment of vascular-access-associated bacteremias and of bone and joint infections due to susceptible gram-positive organisms. Of 35 patients enrolled, 26 had osteomyelitis, 8 had vascular-access-associated bacteremias, and 1 had a joint infection. A total of 38 gram-positive isolates were identified: 23 Staphylococcus aureus and 6 coagulase-negative staphylococcus and 9 streptococcus isolates. After at least 6 months of follow-up, 17 patients were evaluable for efficacy: 10 of 14 (71%) with osteomyelitis and 3 of 3 with vascular-access-associated bacteremias had full resolution of their infections. Inadequate debridement, the presence of metal, and inadequate dosing were likely causes of two failures and two relapses in patients with osteomyelitis. For all but two organisms, teicoplanin MICs were less than or equal to 2 micrograms/ml. Patients who responded had median peak and trough serum bactericidal levels at serum dilutions of 1:64 and 1:16; trough levels of teicoplanin in serum were greater than 30 micrograms/ml. Patients did not respond as expected to daily doses of 4 mg/kg of body weight, which consequently were increased to greater than or equal to 15 mg/kg. Audiology testing of 20 patients found 2 with a mild loss of high-frequency hearing; 1 patient complained of tinnitus. Patients tolerated peak levels in serum as high as 127 micrograms/ml and trough levels of 49 micrograms/ml. However, 5 of 18 patients (28%) whose daily dose was greater than or equal to 12 mg/kg developed drug fever and rash and had teicoplanin discontinued. Further study of the antibiotic at such higher doses is needed.


Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 December; 34(12): 2392-2397




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
J. Clin. Microbiol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1990 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.