0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Use of Cefazolin for Peritonitis Treatment in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          For over two decades, intraperitoneal administration of vancomycin and an aminoglycoside has been an accepted regimen for the empiric treatment of peritonitis in the peritoneal dialysis patient, until definite identification of the organism has been made. The recent emergence of vancomycin-resistant organisms has been of great concern in many centers. The current treatment recommendation therefore is to use cefazolin in place of vancomycin. We analyzed peritonitis data from January 1, 1996 to June 30, 1997, prior to switching over to cefazolin. Seventy-five percent (27 episodes) in 1997 as compared to 78% in 1996 were due to gram-positive organisms. Twenty-two percent (8 episodes) were due to gram- negative organisms in 1997, 21% in 1996, and 3% (1 episode) due to yeast in 1997, 3% in 1996. Staphylococcus epidermidis (SE) caused 33% of the gram-positive peritonitis episodes in 1997 as compared to 37% in 1996. Twenty-two percent of the gram-positive episodes were due to Staphylococcus aureus (SA) in 1997 and 46% in 1996. Enterococcal infections were 26% in 1997 and 1% in 1996. All of these were confined to only 1 patient. The antibiogram revealed 100% sensitivity of both SA and SE to vancomycin and 100% sensitivity of SA to cefazolin, but only 11% sensitivity of SE to cefazolin. The same patient population had a 48% sensitivity of SE to cefazolin in 1996, showing a sudden and substantial increase in resistance to SE. Even though SE is thought to be a less virulent organism, treating patients with a high probability of being infected by SE with an antibiotic showing 89% resistance is not warranted.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          AJN
          Am J Nephrol
          10.1159/issn.0250-8095
          American Journal of Nephrology
          S. Karger AG
          0250-8095
          1421-9670
          1999
          October 1999
          26 November 1999
          : 19
          : 5
          : 555-558
          Affiliations
          aDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Tex.;Sections of bPathology, and cInfectious Diseases and Epidemiology, and dDepartment of Medicine, Saint Francis Hospital, Hartford, Conn., USA
          Article
          13519 Am J Nephrol 1999;19:555–558
          10.1159/000013519
          10575183
          © 1999 S. Karger AG, Basel

          Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

          Page count
          Tables: 4, References: 12, Pages: 4
          Product
          Self URI (application/pdf): https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/13519
          Categories
          Clinical Study

          Comments

          Comment on this article