Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
As clinical evidence evaluating eravacycline (ERV) against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia remains limited worldwide, this real-world study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ERV for treating S. maltophilia infections in China. This multicentre, retrospective, observational study analysed 103 adult patients treated with ERV (≥ 72 h) for S. maltophilia infections from August 2023 to August 2024. Primary outcomes were overall clinical effectiveness at the end of treatment (EOT) and 30 days post-EOT. Secondary outcomes included patient prognosis, microbiological efficacy and adverse events (AEs). The overall clinical effectiveness rate was 90.3% (93/103) at EOT and 88.3% (91/103) 30 days post-EOT, with 88.3% (91/103) of patients showing clinical improvement upon discharge. Among patients, isolated pneumonia was the most common presentation (71/103, 68.9%), followed by pneumonia with concomitant infection (21/103, 20.4%) and isolated extrapulmonary infection (11/103, 10.7%). At EOT, clinical effectiveness rates were 87.3% (62/71) for isolated pneumonia, 95.2% (20/21) for pneumonia with concomitant infection and 90.9% (10/11) for isolated extrapulmonary infection; by day 30 post-EOT, these rates remained stable across the respective subgroups. Among 61 patients with evaluable follow-up cultures, S. maltophilia clearance was 93.4% (57/61). Adverse events were minimal (3/103, 2.9%) and not severe. In this real-world study, ERV-containing regimens showed favourable clinical outcomes in S. maltophilia infections. While ERV represents a potential alternative or salvage option, the observed effectiveness must be interpreted cautiously due to baseline selection bias.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhai et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: