Oral versus Intravenous Antibiotics for Bone and Joint Infection

By Ho‐Kwong Li, I. Rombach, R. Zambellas, S. Walker, M. McNally, B. Atkins, Benjamin A Lipsky, H. Hughes, D. Bose, Michelle Kümin and 49 more. New England Journal of Medicine, 2019

736 citations recorded by the source corpus.

BACKGROUND The management of complex orthopedic infections usually includes a prolonged course of intravenous antibiotic agents. We investigated whether oral antibiotic therapy is noninferior to intravenous antibiotic therapy for this indication. METHODS We enrolled adults who were being treated for bone or joint infection at 26 U.K. centers. Within 7 days after surgery (or, if the infection was being managed without surgery, within 7 days after the start of antibiotic treatment), participants were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous or oral antibiotics to complete the first 6 weeks of therapy. Follow‐on oral antibiotics were permitted in both groups. The primary end point was definitive treatment failure within 1 year after randomization. In the analysis of the risk of the primary end point, the noninferiority margin was 7.5 percentage points. RESULTS Among the 1054 participants (527 in each group), end‐point data were available for 1015 (96.3%). Treatment failure occurred in 74 of 506 participants (14.6%) in the intravenous group and 67 of 509 participants (13.2%) in the oral group. Missing end‐point data (39 participants, 3.7%) were imputed. The intention‐to‐treat analysis showed a difference in the risk of definitive treatment failure (oral group vs. intravenous group) of ‐1.4 percentage points (90% confidence interval [CI], ‐4.9 to 2.2; 95% CI, ‐5.6 to 2.9), indicating noninferiority. Complete‐case, per‐protocol, and sensitivity analyses supported this result. The between‐group difference in the incidence of serious adverse events was not significant (146 of 527 participants [27.7%] in the intravenous group and 138 of 527 [26.2%] in the oral group; P=0.58). Catheter complications, analyzed as a secondary end point, were more common in the intravenous group (9.4% vs. 1.0%). CONCLUSIONS Oral antibiotic therapy was noninferior to intravenous antibiotic therapy when used during the first 6 weeks for complex orthopedic infection, as assessed by treatment failure at 1 year. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; OVIVA Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN91566927.)

Subfields: Epidemiology, Pharmacology, Surgery

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ddaf9776c7c705b94e02d6701fe547e928c22ab0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Benjamin A Lipsky
É. Senneville
T. Rawson
Z. Abbas
J. Aragón-Sánchez
M. Diggle
J. Embil
N. Zhu

Citations in the corpus

Bacterial and fungal co-infection in individuals with coronavirus: A rapid review to support COVID-19 antimicrobial prescribing (2020, background): “[48] [49] [50] [51] With a need to ensure that bed capacity is maintained, a focus on developing guidance on optimal pharmacokineticpharmacodynamic strategies for common infections requiring antimicrobial should be considered to support early oral antibiotic switch and treatment de-escalation in pat”
Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update) (2020, background): “An ongoing large, multicenter US trial (VA INTREPID) is examining the role of rifampin in treating DFO.156 Several case series, and a recent large RCT, have shown that oral antibiotic therapy (usually after at least a few days of intravenous therapy) is as effective as, safer, and less expensive tha”