Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 7, 2025
Cefoperazone-treated Mouse Model of Clinically-relevant Clostridium difficile Strain R20291
Published on: December 10, 2016
Ceft-to-Ceft Study: Real-Life Experience with Ceftaroline and Ceftobiprole in Treatment of the Principal Infectious
Daniel Arnés García1, Inés Pitto-Robles1, Jorge Calderón Parra2
1Servicio de Medicina Interna, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, 18014 Granada, Spain.
Background:
To compare the real-life effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil (ceftaroline-F) and ceftobiprole medocaril (ceftobiprole-M) for infections in hospitalized patients.
Methods:
This comparative, observational, retrospective, and multicenter Spanish study included patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) and hospitalized patients treated for at least 48 h with ceftaroline-F or ceftobiprole-M between their first incorporation in the clinical protocol of each hospital and 31 July 2022.
Results:
Ceftaroline-F was administered to 227 patients and ceftobiprole-M to 212. In comparison to the latter, ceftaroline-F-treated participants were younger (63.02 vs. 66.40 years, OR 1.1; 95%CI: 1.001-1.05) and had higher rates of septic shock (OR 0.27; 95%CI: 0.09-0.81) and higher frequencies of targeted (57.7 vs. 29.7%; OR: 0.35; 95%CI: 0.18-0.69) and combined (89.0 vs. 45.8%, OR: 0.13; 95%CI: 0.06-0.28) therapies that were second line or more (82.4% vs. 64.6%%; OR 0.35; 95%CI: 0.18-0.69), and higher rates of infections due to Gram-positive cocci (92.7 vs. 64.7%, p = 0.001), bacteremia (51.9 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.001), infective endocarditis (24.2 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.0001), and mechanical ventilation-associated pneumonia (8.8 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.0001). Ceftobiprole-M was more frequently administered against polymicrobial infections (38.1 vs. 14.0%, p = 0.001), those produced by Gram-negative bacilli (19.7 vs. 6.0%, p = 0.0001), nosocomial pneumonia (33 vs. 10.6%, p = 0.0001), and skin and soft-tissue infections (25.4 vs. 10.1%, p = 0.0001). Patients treated with ceftaroline-F had a longer hospital stay (36 (IQR: 19-60) vs. 19.50 (IQR: 12-30.75, p = 0.0001) days), with no difference in infection-related mortality at 14 (13.2 vs. 8.0%, p = 0.078) or 28 (4.8 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.415) days or in dropout rate for adverse effects (2.2 vs. 0.9%; p = 1).
Conclusions:
The fifth-generation cephalosporins, ceftaroline-F and ceftobiprole-M, are safe and effective in real life, with no difference between them in health outcomes.
Related Concept Videos
01:22Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
01:26Healthcare Associated Infections I: Iatrogenic, Exogenic and Endogenic
HAIs significantly increase the cost of health care. Extended stays in healthcare institutions, increased disability, increased costs of medications, including specialized antibiotics, and prolonged recovery times add to the patient's expenses and the healthcare institution and funding bodies.
01:26Pulmonary Tuberculosis IV
Several diagnostic approaches are used to detect TB. The conventional method is the Tuberculin Skin Test (TST), also known as the Mantoux test. However, this method has...
01:16Treating Helicobacter pylori in Peptic Ulcers: Antimicrobial Therapy
01:28Pneumonia IV: Management
Bacterial Pneumonia Treatment
For bacterial pneumonia, antibiotics serve as the cornerstone of therapy. Initial treatment often begins with empirical antibiotics, tailored to the anticipated causative organism and adjusted based on culture results. Key antibiotic choices include:
01:17Transmission-based Precautions I: Contact, Enteric, and Droplets
Contact Precautions:
Contact precautions are the measures taken to prevent the transmission of infectious agents, especially epidemiologically important microorganisms such as MRSA or influenza, primarily transmitted through direct or indirect contact with an...