Top

Published in:

Open Access 24-11-2023 | Daptomycin | Review

New advances in management and treatment of cardiac implantable electronic devices infections

Authors: Alessandro Russo, Riccardo Serraino, Francesca Serapide, Enrico Maria Trecarichi, Carlo Torti

Published in: Infection | Issue 2/2024

Abstract

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are increasingly used worldwide, and infection of these devices remains one of the most feared complications.

CIED infections (CDIs) represent a challenge for physicians and the healthcare system in general as they require prolonged hospitalization and antibiotic treatment and are burdened by high mortality and high costs, so management of CDIs must be multidisciplinary.

The exact incidence of CDIs is difficult to define, considering that it is influenced by various factors mainly represented by the implanted device and the type of procedure. Risk factors for CDIs could be divided into three categories: device related, patient related, and procedural related and the etiology is mainly sustained by Gram-positive bacteria; however, other etiologies cannot be underestimated. As a matter of fact, the two cornerstones in the treatment of these infections are device removal and antimicrobial treatment. Finally, therapeutic drug monitoring and PK/PD correlations should be encouraged in all patients with CDIs receiving antibiotic therapy and may result in a better clinical outcome and a reduction in antibiotic resistance and economic costs.

In this narrative review, we look at what is new in the management of these difficult-to-treat infections.

Greenspon AJ, Patel JD, Lau E, et al. 16-year trends in the infection burden for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the United States 1993 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(10):1001–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.04.033.CrossRefPubMed

Wilkoff BL, Boriani G, Mittal S, et al. Impact of cardiac implantable electronic device infection: a clinical and economic analysis of the WRAP-IT trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(5): e008280. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.119.008280.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Daneman N, Homenauth E, Saskin R, Ng R, Ha A, Wijeysundera HC. The predictors and economic burden of early-, mid- and late-onset cardiac implantable electronic device infections: a retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(2):255.e1-255.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2019.02.009.CrossRefPubMed

Gitenay E, Molin F, Blais S, et al. Cardiac implantable electronic device infection: detailed analysis of cost implications. Can J Cardiol. 2018;34:1026–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2018.05.001.CrossRefPubMed

Botelho-Nevers E, Thuny F, Casalta JP, et al. Dramatic reduction in infective endocarditis-related mortality with a management-based approach. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:1290–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.192.CrossRefPubMed

Olsen T, Jørgensen OD, Nielsen JC, et al. Risk factors for cardiac implantable electronic device infections: a nationwide Danish study. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:4946–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac576.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Clémenty N, Carion PL, Léotoing L, et al. Infections and associated costs following cardiovascular implantable electronic device implantations: a nationwide cohort study. Europace. 2018;20(12):1974–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux387.CrossRefPubMed

Birnie DH, Wang J, Alings M, et al. Risk factors for infections involving cardiac implanted electronic devices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:2845–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.060.CrossRefPubMed

Knops RE, Olde Nordkamp LRA, Delnoy PHM, et al. Subcutaneous or transvenous defibrillator therapy. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:526–36. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1915932.CrossRefPubMed

10.

El-Chami MF, Bockstedt L, Longacre C, et al. Leadless vs. transvenous single-chamber ventricular pacing in the micra CED study: 2-year follow-up. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:1207–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab767.CrossRefPubMed

11.

El-Chami MF, Bonner M, Holbrook R, et al. Leadless pacemakers reduce risk of device-related infection: review of the potential mechanisms. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17:1393–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.03.019.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Dai M, Cai C, Vaibhav V, et al. Trends of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection in 3 decades: a population-based study. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;5:1071–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2019.06.016.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hernández-Meneses M, Llopis J, Sandoval E, et al. Forty-year trends in cardiac implantable electronic device infective endocarditis. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9:ofac547. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac547.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

King TL, Chew DS, Leal J, et al. Complex cardiac implantable electronic device infections in Alberta, Canada: an epidemiologic cohort study of validated administrative data. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2023.48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Traykov V, Bongiorni MG, Boriani G, et al. Clinical practice and implementation of guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis and management of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: results of a worldwide survey under the auspices of the European heart rhythm association. Europace. 2019;21:1270–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euz137.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Maille B, Koutbi L, Resseguier N, et al. Seasonal variations in cardiac implantable electronic device infections. Heart Vessels. 2019;34(5):824–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-018-1292-4.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Han HC, Hawkins NM, Pearman CM, Birnie DH, Krahn AD. Epidemiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: incidence and risk factors. Europace. 2021;23:iv3–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euab042.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Krahn AD, Longtin Y, Philippon F, et al. Prevention of arrhythmia device infection trial: the PADIT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72:3098–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.09.068.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Tarakji KG, Krahn AD, Poole JE, et al. Risk factors for CIED infection after secondary procedures: insights from the WRAP-IT trial. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2022;8:101–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2021.08.009.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Blomström-Lundqvist C, Traykov V, Erba PA, et al. European heart rhythm association (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections-endorsed by the heart rhythm society (HRS), the Asia Pacific heart rhythm society (APHRS), the Latin American heart rhythm society (LAHRS), international society for cardiovascular infectious diseases (ISCVID) and the European society of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases (ESCMID) in collaboration with the European association for cardio-thoracic surgery (EACTS). Europace. 2020;22:515–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euz246.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Urien JM, Camus C, Leclercq C, et al. The emergence of Staphylococcus aureus as the primary cause of cardiac device-related infective endocarditis. Infection. 2021;49:999–1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-021-01634-5.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Longtin Y, Gervais P, Birnie DH, et al. Impact of choice of prophylaxis on the microbiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: insights from the prevention of arrhythmia device infection trial (PADIT). Open Forum Infect Dis. 2021;8:ofab513. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab513.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Kohli U, Hazra A, Shahab A, et al. Atypical pathogens associated with cardiac implantable electronic device infections. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;44:1549–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.14311.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Durack DT, Lukes AS, Bright DK. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: utilization of specific echocardiographic findings duke endocarditis service. Am J Med. 1994;96:200–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(94)90143-0.CrossRefPubMed

25.

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. https://doi.org/10.1086/313753.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Fowler VG, Durack DT, Selton-Suty C, et al. Duke-ISCVID criteria for infective endocarditis: updating the modified duke criteria. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;2023:ciad271. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad271.CrossRef

27.

Guleri A, More R, Sharma R, Wong M, Abdelrahman A. Use of dalbavancin in infective endocarditis: a case series. JAC Antimicrob Resist. 2021;3:dlab099. https://doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlab099.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Delgado V, Ajmone Marsan N, de Waha S, et al. 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of endocarditis. Eur Heart J. 2023;44:3948–4042. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad193.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Hidalgo-Tenorio C, Vinuesa D, Plata A, et al. DALBACEN cohort: dalbavancin as consolidation therapy in patients with endocarditis and/or bloodstream infection produced by gram-positive cocci. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2019;18:30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-019-0329-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Tobudic S, Forstner C, Burgmann H, et al. Dalbavancin as primary and sequential treatment for gram-positive infective endocarditis: 2-year experience at the general hospital of Vienna. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67:795–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy279.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Johnson JA, Feeney ER, Kubiak DW, Corey GR. Prolonged use of oritavancin for vancomycin-resistant enterococcus faecium prosthetic valve endocarditis. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2015;2:ofv156. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofv156.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Sader HS, Carvalhaes CG, Mendes RE. Ceftaroline activity against Staphylococcus aureus isolated from patients with infective endocarditis, worldwide (2010–2019). Int J Infect Dis. 2021;102:524–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.11.130.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Destache CJ, Guervil DJ, Kaye KS. Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of Gram-positive endocarditis: CAPTURE study experience. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019;53(5):644–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.01.014.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Tascini C, Attanasio V, Ripa M, et al. Ceftobiprole for the treatment of infective endocarditis: a case series. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2020;20:56–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2019.07.020.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Falagas ME, Manta KG, Ntziora F, Vardakas KZ. Linezolid for the treatment of patients with endocarditis: a systematic review of the published evidence. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006;58:273–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkl219.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Muñoz P, Rodríguez-Creixéms M, Moreno M, et al. Linezolid therapy for infective endocarditis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2007;13:211–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2006.01585.x.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Amiyangoda CGK, Wimalaratna H, Bowatte S. A complicated prosthetic valve endocarditis due to methicillin resistant Staphylococci treated with linezolid and ciprofloxacin: a case report. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10:580. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2907-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Muñoz P, De la Villa S, Martínez-Sellés M, et al. Linezolid for infective endocarditis: a structured approach based on a national database experience. Medicine. 2021;100: e27597. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000027597.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Chan LC, Basuino L, Dip EC, Chambers HF. Comparative efficacies of tedizolid phosphate, vancomycin, and daptomycin in a rabbit model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:3252–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.04376-14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Singh KV, Arias CA, Murray BE. Tedizolid as Step-down therapy following daptomycin versus continuation of daptomycin against enterococci and methicillin- and vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a rat endocarditis model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020;64:e02303-e2319. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02303-19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Edgeworth JD, Merante D, Patel S, et al. Compassionate use of cefiderocol as adjunctive treatment of native aortic valve endocarditis due to extremely drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68:1932–4. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy963.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Jean SS, Gould IM, Lee WS, Hsueh PR, International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (ISAC). New drugs for multidrug-resistant gram-negative organisms: time for stewardship. Drugs. 2013;79:705–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-019-01112-1.CrossRef

43.

Jean SS, Lee YL, Liu PY, Lu MC, Ko WC, Hsueh PR. Multicenter surveillance of antimicrobial susceptibilities and resistance mechanisms among Enterobacterales species and non-fermenting gram-negative bacteria from different infection sources in Taiwan from 2016 to 2018. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2022;55:463–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmii.2021.07.015.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Jean SS, Lee WS, Lam C, Hsu CW, Chen RJ, Hsueh PR. Carbapenemase-producing gram-negative bacteria: current epidemics, antimicrobial susceptibility and treatment options. Futur Microbiol. 2015;10:407–25. https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb.14.135.CrossRef

45.

Sakoulas G, Rose W, Nonejuie P, et al. Ceftaroline restores daptomycin activity against daptomycin-nonsusceptible vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:1494–500. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02274-13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, Daum RS, Fridkin SK, Gorwitz RJ, et al. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of America for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:e18–55.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Soriano A, Marco F, Martinez JA, Pisos E, Almela M, Dimova VP, et al. Influence of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:193–200.CrossRefPubMed

48.

van Hal SJ, Lodise TP, Paterson DL. The clinical significance of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration in Staphylococcus aureus infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:755–71.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Mavros MN, Tansarli GS, Vardakas KZ, Rafailidis PI, Karageorgopoulos DE, Falagas ME. Impact of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on clinical outcomes of patients with vancomycin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40:496–509.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Jacob JT, DiazGranados CA. High vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and clinical outcomes in adults with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Infect Dis. 2013;17:e93–100.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Kalil AC, Van Schooneveld TC, Fey PD, Rupp ME. Association between vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and mortality among patients with Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2014;312:1552–64.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Gilbert DN, Wood CA, Kimbrough RC. Failure of treatment with teicoplanin at 6 milligrams/kilogram/day in patients with Staphylococcus aureus intravascular infection. The infectious diseases consortium of oregon. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991;35:79–87.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Calain P, Krause KH, Vaudaux P, Auckenthaler R, Lew D, Waldvogel F, et al. Early termination of a prospective, randomized trial comparing teicoplanin and flucloxacillin for treating severe staphylococcal infections. J Infect Dis. 1987;155:187–91.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Campanile F, Bongiorno D, Borbone S, Falcone M, Giannella M, Venditti M, Stefani S. In vitro activity of daptomycin against methicillin- and multi-resistant Staphylococcus haemolyticus invasive isolates carrying different mec complexes. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008;61:227–31.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Fowler VG Jr, Boucher HW, Corey GR, Abrutyn E, Karchmer AW, Rupp ME, et al. Daptomycin versus standard therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis caused by Staphylococcus aureus. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:653–65.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Falcone M, Russo A, Pompeo ME, Vena A, Marruncheddu L, Ciccaglioni A, et al. Retrospective case-control analysis of patients with staphylococcal infections receiving daptomycin or glycopeptide therapy. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;39:64–8.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Gould IM, David MZ, Esposito S, Garau J, Lina G, Mazzei T, et al. New insights into methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pathogenesis, treatment and resistance. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;39:96–104.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Murray KP, Zhao JJ, Davis SL, Kullar R, Kaye KS, Lephart P, et al. Early use of daptomycin versus vancomycin for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia with vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration >1mg/L. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1562–9.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Cheng CW, Hsu PC, Yang CC, Cheng CW, Lee MH. Influence of early daptomycin therapy on treatment outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia with high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2013;41:293–4.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Carugati M, Bayer AS, Miró JM, Park LP, Guimarães AC, Skoutelis A, et al. High-dose daptomycin therapy for left-sided infective endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57:6213–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Russo A, Peghin M, Givone F, Ingani M, Graziano E, Bassetti M. Daptomycin-containing regimens for treatment of gram-positive endocarditis. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019;54:423–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.08.011.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Mehta S, Singh C, Plata KB, Chanda PK, Paul A, Riosa S, et al. β-Lactams increase the antibacterial activity of daptomycin against clinical methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains and prevent selection of daptomycin-resistant derivatives. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:6192–200.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Dhand A, Bayer AS, Pogliano J, Yang SJ, Bolaris M, Nizet V, et al. Use of antistaphylococcal beta-lactams to increase daptomycin activity in eradicating persistent bacteremia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: role of enhanced daptomycin binding. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;53:158–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Moise PA, Amodio-Groton M, Rashid M, Lamp KC, Hoffman-Roberts HL, Sakoulas G, et al. Multicenter evaluation of the clinical outcomes of daptomycin with and without concomitant β-lactams in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and mild to moderate renal impairment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57:1192–200.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Barber KE, Werth BJ, Ireland CE, Stone NE, Nonejuie P, Sakoulas G, et al. Potent synergy of ceftobiprole plus daptomycin against multiple strains of Staphylococcus aureus with various resistance phenotypes. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014;69:3006–10.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Sakoulas G, Moise PA, Casapao AM, Nonejuie P, Olson J, Okumura CY, et al. Antimicrobial salvage therapy for persistent staphylococcal bacteremia using daptomycin plus ceftaroline. Clin Ther. 2014;36:1317–33.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Hoen B. Non-staphylococcal gram-positive bacteraemia without a known source. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008;32:S15–7.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Gavaldà J, Torres C, Tenorio C, López P, Zaragoza M, Capdevila JA, et al. Efficacy of ampicillin plus ceftriaxone in treatment of experimental endocarditis due to Enterococcus faecalis strains highly resistant to aminoglycosides. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999;4:639–46.CrossRef

69.

Gavaldà J, Len O, Miró JM, Muñoz P, Montejo M, Alarcón A, et al. Brief communication: treatment of enterococcus faecalis endocarditis with ampicillin plus ceftriaxone. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:574–9.CrossRefPubMed

70.

Fernández-Hidalgo N, Almirante B, Gavaldà J, Gurgui M, Peña C, de Alarcón A, et al. Ampicillin plus ceftriaxone is as effective as ampicillin plus gentamicin for treating enterococcus faecalis infective endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1261–8.CrossRefPubMed

71.

Diaz Granados CA, Zimmer SM, Klein M, Jernigan JA. Comparison of mortality associated with vancomycin-resistant and vancomycin-susceptible enterococcal bloodstream infections: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41:327.CrossRefPubMed

72.

Chuang YC, Wang JT, Lin HY, Chang SC. Daptomycin versus linezolid for treatment of vancomycin-resistant enterococcal bacteremia: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:687.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

73.

Scaglione F. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) considerations in the management of gram-positive bacteraemia. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2010;36:S33–9.CrossRefPubMed

74.

Polard E, Le Bouquin V, Le Corre P, Kérebel C, Trout H, Feuillu A, et al. Non steady state and steady state PKS Bayesian forecasting and vancomycin pharmacokinetics in ICU adult patients. Ther Drug Monit. 1999;21:395–403.CrossRefPubMed

75.

Fernández DM, de Gatta GM, Revilla N, Calvo MV, Domínguez-Gil A, Sánchez NA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of vancomycin in ICU patients. Intens Care Med. 2007;33:279–85.CrossRef

76.

Byl B, Clevenbergh P, Jacobs F, Struelens MJ, Zech F, Kentos A, et al. Impact of infectious diseases specialists and microbiological data on the appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy for bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29:60–6.CrossRefPubMed

77.

Wysocki M, Delatour F, Faurisson F, Rauss A, Pean Y, Misset B, et al. Continuous versus intermittent infusion of vancomycin in severe staphylococcal infections: prospective multicenter randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:2460–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

78.

Di Filippo A, De Gaudio AR, Novelli A, Paternostro E, Pelagatti C, Livi P, et al. Continuous infusion of vancomycin in methicillin-resistant staphylococcus infection. Chemotherapy. 1998;44:63–8.CrossRefPubMed

79.

Safdar N, Andes D, Craig WA. In vivo pharmacodynamic activity of daptomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:63–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

80.

Falcone M, Russo A, Cassetta MI, Lappa A, Tritapepe L, d’Ettorre G, et al. Variability of pharmacokinetic parameters in patients receiving different dosages of daptomycin: is therapeutic drug monitoring necessary? J Infect Chemother. 2013;19:732–9.CrossRefPubMed

81.

Cha R, Rybak MJ. Daptomycin against multiple drug-resistant staphylococcus and enterococcus isolates in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model with simulated endocardial vegetations. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2003;47:539–46.CrossRefPubMed

82.

Falcone M, Russo A, Venditti M, Novelli A, Pai MP. Considerations for higher doses of daptomycin in critically ill patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57:1568–76.CrossRefPubMed

83.

Falcone M, Russo A, Venditti M, Novelli A, Pai MP, et al. Reply to Di Paolo. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58:1789–90.CrossRefPubMed

84.

Pai MP, Russo A, Novelli A, Venditti M, Falcone M. Simplified equations using two concentrations to calculate area under the curve for antimicrobials with concentration-dependent pharmacodynamics: daptomycin as a motivating example. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:3162–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

85.

Balice G, Passino C, Bongiorni MG, Segreti L, Russo A, Lastella M, Luci G, Falcone M, Di Paolo A. Daptomycin population pharmacokinetics in patients affected by severe gram-positive infections: an update. Antibiotics. 2022;11:914. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11070914.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

86.

Falcone M, Russo A, Cassetta MI, Lappa A, Tritapepe L, Fallani S, Vullo V, Venditti M, Novelli A. Daptomycin serum levels in critical patients undergoing continuous renal replacement. J Chemother. 2012;24:253–6. https://doi.org/10.1179/1973947812Y.0000000033.CrossRefPubMed

Title: New advances in management and treatment of cardiac implantable electronic devices infections
Authors: Alessandro Russo
Riccardo Serraino
Francesca Serapide
Enrico Maria Trecarichi
Carlo Torti
Publication date: 24-11-2023
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Daptomycin
Vancomycin
Antibiotic
Streptococci
Linezolid
Published in: Infection / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 0300-8126
Electronic ISSN: 1439-0973
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-023-02130-8

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin

Prof. Florian Limbourg

Prof. Anoop Chauhan

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

Infiltration to infection: key virulence players of Helicobacter pylori pathogenicity

Complexity of patients with or without infectious disease consultation in tertiary-care hospitals in Germany

EG.5 (Eris) and BA.2.86 (Pirola) two new subvariants of SARS-CoV-2: a new face of old COVID-19

Cerebral phaeohyphomycosis due to Cladophialophora bantiana: case report and systematic review of cases

A longitudinal prospective study of active tuberculosis in a Western Europe setting: insights and findings

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis—how common and how severe is it as a complication of malaria? Retrospective case series and review of the literature

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

At a glance: The STEP trials