Retrospective analysis shows no significant mortality improvement with ceftazidime-avibactam combination therapy for bloodstream infections in ICU patients, indicating similar outcomes to monotherapy.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the causal effect of ceftazidime/avibactam (C/A) combination therapy versus monotherapy on mortality and clinical success in patients with KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) infections in intensive care unit. METHODS: This multi-centre, retrospective observational study (2021-2023) included adults with KPC-Kp bloodstream infections or pneumonia treated with C/A-based regimens. We employed a counterfactual framework using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to estimate the average treatment effect on 30-day mortality. Clinical success was further assessed using Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) analysis and partial credit scoring based on patient-perspective scenarios. RESULTS: Among 123 included patients, 77 (62.6%) received monotherapy and 46 (37.4%) received combination therapy. The combination group presented with significantly higher baseline severity, including higher APACHE II scores and rates of septic shock. In the IPTW-adjusted analysis, 30-day survival was 73.8% (95% CI: 56-92%) with combination therapy compared with 60.8% (95% CI: 46.8-77%) with monotherapy. The survival probability ratio was 1.21 (95% CI: 0.80-1.45), indicating no statistically significant survival benefit. The DOOR analysis showed a 54.7% (95% CI: 48.9%-60.4%) probability of a more favourable outcome with combination therapy, which was not statistically significant. Mean partial credit scores did not differ significantly across scenarios prioritizing survival or adverse event avoidance. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, C/A-based combination therapy did not provide a significant survival advantage or an improved clinical desirability ranking compared with monotherapy, after adjusting for confounding factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marino et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: