Outcomes of Appropriate Empiric Combination versus Monotherapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremia

Abstract

ABSTRACTPseudomonas aeruginosabacteremia is associated with high hospital mortality. Empirical combination therapy is commonly used to increase the likelihood of appropriate therapy, but the benefits of employing >1 active agent have yet to be established. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients receiving appropriate empirical combination versus monotherapy forP. aeruginosabacteremia. This was a retrospective, multicenter, cohort study of hospitalized adult patients withP. aeruginosabacteremia from 2002 to 2011. The primary endpoint (30-day mortality) was assessed using multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for underlying confounding variables. Secondary endpoints of hospital mortality and time to mortality were assessed by Fisher's exact test and the Cox proportional hazards model, respectively. A total of 384 patients were analyzed. Thirty-day mortality was higher for patients receiving inappropriate therapy than for those receiving appropriate empirical therapy (43.8% versus 21.5%;P= 0.03). However, there were no statistical differences in 30-day mortality following appropriate empirical combination versus monotherapy after adjusting for baseline APACHE II scores and lengths of hospital stay prior to the onset of bacteremia (P= 0.55). Observed hospital mortality was 36.6% for patients administered combination therapy, compared with 28.7% for monotherapy patients (P= 0.17). After adjusting for baseline APACHE II scores, the relationship between time to mortality and combination therapy was not statistically significant (P= 0.59). Overall, no significant differences were observed for 30-day mortality, hospital mortality, and time to mortality between combination and monotherapy forP. aeruginosabacteremia. Empirical combination therapy did not appear to offer an additional benefit, as long as the isolate was susceptible to at least one antimicrobial agent.