Abstract
Objective Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is the leading cause of infectious nosocomial diarrhea. Although initial fidaxomicin or vancomycin treatment is recommended by most major guidelines to treat severe CDI, there exists varied recommendations for first-episode non-severe CDI. Given the discrepancy in current treatment guidelines, we sought to evaluate the use of initial vancomycin versus metronidazole for first-episode non-severe CDI.
Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult inpatients with first-episode CDI at our institution from January 2013 to May 2018. The initial vancomycin versus initial metronidazole cohorts were examined using a multivariate logistic regression model.
Results Patients (n = 737) had a median age of 72.3 years and 357 (48.4%) had hospital-acquired infection. Among patients with non-severe CDI (n = 326), recurrence, new incident infection, and 30-day mortality rates were 16.2%, 10.9%, and 5.3%, respectively, when treated with initial metronidazole, compared to 20.0%, 1.4%, and 10.0%, respectively, when treated with initial vancomycin. In an adjusted multivariable analysis, the use of initial vancomycin for the treatment of non-severe CDI was associated with a reduction in new incident infection (ORadj: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.02–0.86; P=0.035), compared to initial metronidazole.
Conclusions Initial vancomycin was associated with a reduced rate of new incident infection in the treatment of adult inpatients with first-episode non-severe CDI. These findings support the use of initial vancomycin for all inpatients with CDI, when fidaxomicin is unavailable.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors received no specific funding for this project.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study protocol was approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (Project: 2018-3543). The Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board has categorized this retrospective cohort study as minimal risk, defined as no potential for negative impact on the health and safety of the participant, and waiver of consent for participation was obtained.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos