0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Association Between Vancomycin Minimum Inhibitory Concentration and Mortality Among Patients With Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infections A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis FREE

Andre C. Kalil, MD, MPH1; Trevor C. Van Schooneveld, MD1; Paul D. Fey, PhD2; Mark E. Rupp, MD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Disease, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha
2Department of Pathology and Microbiology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha
JAMA. 2014;312(15):1552-1564. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.6364.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is a worldwide problem. It is unclear whether higher-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) is associated with mortality. This potential association has direct consequences for patients and public health.

Data Sources  PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Evidence-based Medicine BMJ, and the American College of Physicians Journal Club were searched from inception through April 2014.

Study Selection  Studies reporting mortality and vancomycin MIC in patients with SAB were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis  Two authors performed the literature search and the study selection separately. Random-effects modeling was used for all analyses.

Main Outcomes and Measures  All-cause mortality.

Findings  Among 38 included studies that involved 8291 episodes of SAB, overall mortality was 26.1%. The estimated mortality was 26.8% among SAB episodes (n = 2740) in patients with high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L) compared with 25.8% mortality among SAB episodes (n = 5551) in patients with low-vancomycin MIC (<1.5 mg/L) (adjusted risk difference [RD], 1.6% [95% CI, −2.3% to 5.6%]; P = .43). For the highest-quality studies, the estimated mortality was 26.2% among SAB episodes (n = 2318) in patients with high-vancomycin MIC compared with 27.8% mortality among SAB episodes (n = 4168) in patients with low-vancomycin MIC (RD, 0.9% [95% CI, −2.9% to 4.6%]; P = .65). In studies that included only methicillin-resistant S aureus infections (n = 7232), the mortality among SAB episodes (n = 2384) in patients with high-vancomycin MIC was 27.6% compared with mortality of 27.4% among SAB episodes (n = 4848) in patients with low-vancomycin MIC (adjusted RD, 1.6% [95% CI, −2.3% to 5.5%]; P = .41). No significant differences in risk of death were observed in subgroups with high-vancomycin MIC vs low-vancomycin MIC values across different study designs, microbiological susceptibility assays, MIC cutoffs, clinical outcomes, duration of bacteremia, previous vancomycin exposure, and treatment with vancomycin.

Conclusions and Relevance  In this meta-analysis of SAB episodes, there were no statistically significant differences in the risk of death when comparing patients with S aureus exhibiting high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L) to those with low-vancomycin MIC (<1.5 mg/L), although the findings cannot definitely exclude an increased mortality risk. These findings should be considered when interpreting vancomycin susceptibility and in determining whether alternative antistaphylococcal agents are necessary for patients with SAB with elevated but susceptible vancomycin MIC values.

Figures in this Article

Staphylococcus aureus is among the most common causes of health care–associated infection throughout the world.1,2 It causes a wide range of infections, with bloodstream infections (S aureus bacteremia [SAB]) among the most common and lethal.3 In addition, SAB is associated with prolonged hospital stay, need for intensive care, requirement for surgical intervention, and increased costs for patients and the health care system.4

For more than 50 years, the primary therapy for S aureus infections has been either semisynthetic penicillins or vancomycin. More recent reports have documented an increase in the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for vancomycin, referred to as vancomycin “MIC creep.”5 Although this phenomenon may be influenced by the type of microbiological susceptibility assay used, type of S aureus strain examined, or type of patient population evaluated, what is more concerning are reports suggesting that elevations in vancomycin MIC values may be associated with increased treatment failure and mortality.

Three previous meta-analyses68 have attempted to address the potential association between MIC values and clinical outcomes and suggested that elevated vancomycin MIC levels may be associated with worse outcomes. However, all 3 studies included highly heterogeneous patient populations, combined different sites of infection, primarily analyzed non-SAB infections, evaluated mostly treatment failure (a soft outcome susceptible to measurement bias and highly dependent on local management practices), and lacked recently published literature. Several important questions concerning the potential clinical ramifications of vancomycin MIC remain unanswered. Are elevated (but still susceptible) vancomycin MIC levels associated with higher mortality? If higher-vancomycin MIC values are associated with worsened outcome, which method of MIC testing is the most predictive? Should vancomycin be avoided when MIC levels are elevated?

This study focused on addressing these questions by systematically evaluating the available evidence regarding the association of vancomycin MIC elevation with mortality in patients with SAB.

Literature Search

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Evidence-based Medicine BMJ, and the American College of Physicians Journal Club were searched from inception through April 2014. Also, abstracts from the following societies’ annual meetings were searched from 2006-2013: the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. The literature search strategy is presented in eAppendix 1 (in the Supplement). No language restrictions were applied. Two authors (A.K. and T.V.) performed the literature search and the study selection separately. Authors of included studies were contacted if any clarification was needed for the original report. Any disagreement was resolved by a final consensus.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

All human studies that evaluated patients with SAB, reported vancomycin MICs, and provided mortality outcomes were included.

Studies were excluded if all-cause mortality outcome was not provided; mortality was not stratified by MIC values; mortality from bloodstream infections was not reported or it could not be separated from other sites of infection; or if MICs were measured only by automated susceptibility assays.

Data Extraction

The following variables were collected from all studies: authors, publication year, study design, sample size, patient age, MIC cutoff, microbiological susceptibility assay, test for heteroresistance, methicillin-resistance status, duration of bacteremia, intensive care unit (ICU) exposure, APACHE II score, Charlson score, previous vancomycin exposure, presence of endocarditis, antistaphylococcal drugs used for treatment, vancomycin trough levels, and all-cause mortality.

Definitions

The a priori definition for the high-vancomycin MIC group for this study required an MIC of greater than or equal to 1.5 mg/L with no upper-limit values. This cutoff was chosen in order to use a conservative level and minimize the risk of not detecting a clinically meaningful outcome difference. Additionally, in contrast to broth microdilution susceptibility testing, which typically detects MIC values in 2-fold dilutions (eg, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 mg/L), Etest methodology (Epsilometer test in which the MIC is determined through use of a rectangular antibiotic-impregnated strip) was also used because it can detect other values (eg, 1.5 mg/L). Thus, the use of greater than or equal to 1.5 mg/L as the vancomycin interpretive cutoff value includes those studies using both broth microdilution (MIC values <1.0 mg/L are the low-vancomycin group; MIC values ≥2.0 mg/L are the high-vancomycin group) and Etest (MIC values <1.5 mg/L are the low-vancomycin group; MIC values ≥1.5 mg/L are the high-vancomcyin group). The definition of high-vancomycin MIC was extracted according to the original report from each study.

Subgroup analyses were also planned a priori to evaluate different MIC cutoffs, different microbiological susceptibility assays, methicillin-resistance status, and the presence of heteroresistance (phenotype in which a small subpopulation of bacterial cells have decreased susceptibility or are resistant to vancomycin), as defined by individual studies. The prospective defined primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Subgroup analyses were prospectively planned to evaluate different follow-up times, ie, combined 28- and 30-day mortality, hospital mortality, and overall mortality by severity of illness, previous vancomycin exposure, ICU admission, duration of bacteremia, vancomycin trough levels, presence of endocarditis, and vancomycin treatment. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale9 was used to evaluate the quality of the studies, with the best-quality score being 9 (maximum), and the highest-quality studies defined by a score of at least 8.

Statistical Analysis

The risk difference (RD) was calculated for all analyses. All data were pooled by the use of random-effects modeling according to DerSimonian and Laird methodology.10 Random-effects modeling accounted for both within-study and between-study variances and then used both to assign the study weights. Because random-effects modeling does not assume a common effect size for all studies, its results are more generalizable to different populations. Positive RDs indicate higher mortality with high-vancomycin MIC compared with low-vancomycin MIC values. The T2 method was used to assess the magnitude of between-study variance (heterogeneity). The T2 method is measured in the same units of study outcome and does not increase with number or size of studies; heterogeneity degree was defined as low (<0.01), moderate (0.01-0.1), and high (>0.1).11

A mixed-effects meta-regression was performed by the method of moments12 to evaluate statistically the effect of continuous variables on the risk of mortality with high-vancomycin MIC. The variables evaluated by meta-regression were age, APACHE II score, Charlson score, MIC cutoff, previous vancomycin exposure, vancomycin trough level, duration of bacteremia, proportion of patients with endocarditis, patient hospitalization in the ICU, and vancomycin treatment. The MOOSE guidelines13 for meta-analysis of observational studies were followed (eTable 1 in the Supplement), and PRISMA criteria14 were performed for the search methodology (Figure 1). Egger regression and the Begg and Mazumdar methods were used to evaluate publication bias.1517

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
Study Selection for for Vancomycin MIC and Mortality in Patients With Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

MIC indicates minimum inhibitory concentration.

Graphic Jump Location

Results with 2-sided P values less than .05 were considered statistically significant. All meta-analyses were performed with Comprehensive Meta-analysis software version 3.0 (Biostat).

Figure 1 describes the literature search. A total of 38 studies (N = 8291 episodes of SAB) were included in this meta-analysis (Table 1 and Table 2).1855 Overall mortality was 26.1%.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1.  Vancomycin MIC and Mortality in Patients With S aureus Bacteremia Studies, 2003-2010a
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2.  Vancomycin MIC and Mortality in Patients With S aureus Bacteremia Studies, 2011-2014a
Vancomycin MIC and Mortality Outcome

The adjusted absolute risk of mortality among patients with SAB with high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L; n = 2740 patients; mortality, 26.8%) was not statistically different from patients with SAB with low-vancomycin MIC (<1.5 mg/L; n = 5551 patients; mortality, 25.8%) with an RD of 1.6% (95% CI, −2.3% to 5.6%), P = .43, and T2 = 0.007 (Figure 2). When the outcome was analyzed by 30-day mortality or by hospital mortality separately, the results for 30-day mortality (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 1827 patients; mortality, 22.2%; vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 3498 patients; mortality, 22.4%) showed an RD of 1.0% (95% CI, −4.7% to 6.8%), P = .73, and T2 = 0.011; and for hospital mortality (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 913 patients; mortality, 36%; vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 2053 patients; mortality, 31.6%), the RD was 2.5% (95% CI, −1.9% to 6.8%), P = .27, and T2 = 0.001 (Figure 3).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.
Risk Difference for Overall Mortality for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3.
Risk Difference for Hospital, 30-Day, and Overall Mortality for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Vancomycin MIC Cutoff and Mortality Outcome

Various definitions of high-vancomycin MIC were used and the results obtained when specific MIC cutoffs were analyzed (Figure 4) showed no evidence that the specific MIC cutoff was associated with mortality. For MIC of greater than or equal to 1.5 mg/L (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 1880 patients; mortality, 25.2%; and low-vancomycin MIC: n = 2537 patients; mortality, 25.2%), RD was 1.0% (95% CI, −4.6% to 6.6%), P = .72, and T2 = 0.007. For MIC of greater than or equal to 2.0 mg/L (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 753 patients; mortality, 29.6%; and low-vancomycin MIC: n = 2614 patients; mortality, 23.6%), RD was 3.3% (95% CI, −3.4% to 9.9%), P = .34, and T2 = 0.011. For MIC of greater than or equal to 4.0 mg/L (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 65 patients; mortality, 27.7%; and low-vancomycin MIC: n = 99 patients; mortality, 33.3%), RD was −6.4% (95% CI, −32% to 19%), P = .62, and T2 = 0.015. For MIC of greater than or equal to 8.0 mg/L (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 42 patients; mortality, 47.6%; and low-vancomycin MIC: n = 301 patients; mortality, 46.2%), RD was −1.8% (95% CI, −18% to 14%), P = .82, and T2 = 0.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 4.
Mortality by Different MIC Cutoffs and Overall for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Vancomycin MIC Assay Type and Mortality Outcome

Various methods were used to assess vancomycin MIC values but the majority of studies used broth microdilution (BMD) or the Etest. For BMD (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 447 patients; mortality, 30%; and low-vancomycin MIC: n = 1301 patients; mortality, 30.7%), the RD was 1.3% (95% CI, −5.5% to 8.1%), P = .71, and T2 = 0.004. For the Etest (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 2293 patients; mortality, 26.2%; and low-vancomycin MIC: n = 4250 patients; mortality, 24.3%), RD was 1.5% (95% CI, −3.3% to 6.2%), P = .55, and T2 = 0.008 (Figure 5). There was no evidence that the method of vancomycin MIC determination was associated with mortality.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 5.
Mortality by Assay Type and Overall for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

BMD indicates broth microdilution; Etest, epsilometer test. High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Staphylococcal Heteroresistance and Mortality Outcome

Not all studies evaluated for the presence of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate–S aureus (hVISA); however, 7 studies did and showed the following results. The presence of heteroresistance for high-vancomycin MIC (n = 166 patients; mortality, 30.7%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 807 patients; mortality, 35.4%) showed an RD of −7.0% (95% CI, −14.6% to 0.6%), P = .07, and T2 = 0. The absence of heteroresistance reporting for high-vancomycin MIC (n = 885; mortality, 27.9%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 2263; mortality, 20.6%) showed an RD of 1.2% (95% CI, −6.7% to 9.0%), P = .77, and T2 = 0.001. The unavailable heteroresistance information for high-vancomycin MIC (n = 1689; mortality, 25.8%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 2481; mortality, 27.4%) showed an RD of 1.9% (95% CI, −2.0% to 5.9%), P = .33, and T2 = 0.002. Heteroresistance was further analyzed by the type of measurement, ie, for population-based for high-vancomycin MIC (n = 122; mortality, 25.4%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 510; mortality, 28.4%), the RD was −2.5% (95% CI, −17.2% to 12.1%), P = .74, and T2 = 0.011; and not population-based for high-vancomycin MIC (n = 135; mortality, 34.1%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 564; mortality, 35.9%), the RD was 1.9% (95% CI, −7.2% to 11%), P = .68, and T2 = 0.

Methicillin Susceptibility Status and Mortality Outcome

Vancomycin MIC values were not associated with mortality when evaluated by methicillin resistance status for high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L; n = 2384; mortality, 27.6%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 4848; mortality, 27.4%), which showed an RD of 1.6% (95% CI, −2.3% to 5.5%), P = .41, and T2 = 0.005. In studies with outcomes for both methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-sensitive S aureus (MSSA), high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L; n = 356; mortality, 21.3%) vs low-vancomycin MIC (n = 703; mortality, 21.1%) showed an RD of 0.1% (95% CI, −16.6% to 16.4%), P = .99, and T2 = 0.023. No MSSA-only analysis could be performed since no study reported the mortality outcome separated for MSSA only.

Vancomycin Treatment and Mortality Outcome

Many of the studies reported use of multiple antistaphylococcal drugs according to clinician preference, so outcome analysis related to each specific drug treatment when more than 1 drug was used could not be performed. However, this meta-analysis could stratify the studies by the proportion of patients who received vancomycin treatment. For vancomycin administered to 100% of patients (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 1021; mortality, 31.0% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 1868; mortality, 30.6%), RD was 1.1% (95% CI −4.9% to 7.1%), P = .72, and T2 = 0.007. For vancomycin administered to 50% to 99% of patients (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 1504; mortality, 23.1% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 3196; mortality, 22.4%), RD was 1.8% (95% CI, −4.6% to 8.2%), P = .58, and T2 = 0.011. For vancomycin administered to less than 50% of patients (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 154; mortality, 34.4% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 400; mortality, 30.0%), RD was 1.7% (95% CI, −7.1% to 10.5%), P = .71, and T2 = 0. For studies in which vancomycin treatment status was not noted (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 61; mortality, 26.2% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 87; mortality, 26.4%), RD was 0.2% (95% CI, −14.6% to 14.2%), P = .98, and T2 = 0.

Year of Publication and Mortality Outcome

To better assess whether evolving changes in the standard of care may have been associated with confounding, an analysis by year of study publication was performed. No significant changes in mortality outcome were observed with year of publication (eFigure 1 in the Supplement).

Quality of Study Design and Mortality Outcome

In analysis in which studies were grouped according to the strength of study design, no mortality differences were noted between prospective cohorts, retrospective cohorts, case-controls, and case-series designs (eFigure 2 in the Supplement and see eReferences in the Supplement for eFigures references).

Sensitivity Analysis

Because the case-series design is known to be more prone to selection bias than cohort and case-control studies, an analysis was performed without studies that used case-series design (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 2722; mortality, 26.6% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 5483; mortality, 25.5%) in which the RD was 1.2% (95% CI, −2.7% to 5.1%), P = .54, and T2 = 0.007. A sensitivity analysis was performed that excluded studies using either case-control or case-series methodology (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 2695; mortality, 26.3% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 5260; mortality, 24.6%) in which the RD was 1.0% (95% CI, −2.9% to 5.0%), P = .60; and T2 = 0.008. Additionally, a study quality analysis found similar results when the analysis was restricted to the highest-quality studies (Newcastle-Ottawa scale based with scores of 8-9) (high-vancomycin MIC: n = 2318; mortality, 26.2% vs low-vancomycin MIC: n = 4168; mortality, 27.8%) showing an RD of 0.9% (95% CI, −2.9% to 4.6%), P = .65, and T2 = 0.002.

Meta-regression

Several factors that could have been associated with the mortality outcome (represented as the RD in the y-axis) were analyzed as continuous predictor variables (x-axis). The factor noted to be significantly related to mortality in the high-vancomycin MIC group was percent mortality in the low-vancomycin MIC group (eFigure 3 in the Supplement) in which y = −0.139 − 0.0045 (95% CI, −0.0075 to −0.0015)* ×; P = .003. Because disease severity scores were only reported in a few studies, the control group (low-vancomycin MIC) mortality was considered a surrogate measure of the baseline disease severity. Other factors of clinical importance analyzed as continuous variables were as follows: age (P = .57); Charlson score (P = .08); vancomycin MIC cutoff (P = .54); vancomycin exposure in the previous 6 months (P = .88); vancomycin trough levels (P = .92); duration of bacteremia (P = .11); proportion of patients with endocarditis (P = .57); proportion of patients hospitalized in the ICU (P = .09); and proportion of patients who received vancomycin treatment (P = .24). See eAppendix 2 in the Supplement for the metaregression equations and eTable 2 in the Supplement for the metaregression variables.

Publication Bias Analysis

No significant bias was detected by using Egger regression analysis: intercept = −0.472, standard error = 0.525, P = .37, or by Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation: τ = −0.045, z = 0.402, P = .69.

The main finding of this meta-analysis of 8291 episodes of SAB was that there were no statistically significant differences in the risk of death when comparing patients with S aureus isolates exhibiting high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L) to those with low-vancomycin MIC (<1.5 mg/L), although the findings cannot definitely exclude an increased mortality risk. This conclusion remained consistent independent of different MIC cutoffs, microbiological susceptibility assays, methicillin susceptibility status, vancomycin heteroresistance, presence of endocarditis, previous exposure to vancomycin, and treatment with vancomycin. The large sample size and the low degree of heterogeneity among studies further support this conclusion.

The primary potential explanation cited for the association of elevated vancomycin MIC values with outcomes focuses on pharmacokinetic indices. Elevations in vancomycin MIC may influence pharmacokinetic targets and studies have suggested that when MIC values are greater than 1 mg/L, achievement of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) MIC target levels would be unlikely. Because the majority of persons with SAB are at least initially treated with vancomycin, it would be expected that as the MIC increases, outcomes would worsen.56,57 In the present study, elevated vancomycin MICs were not significantly associated with increased mortality although the upper bound of the CI surrounding the point estimate for the RD was consistent with as much as a 5.6% increase in mortality risk associated with high-vancomycin MIC vs low-vancomycin MIC. There are several possible explanations for these findings.

First, despite the narrow 95% CI of the overall results in this study, the final interval shows that either increases or decreases in mortality could be associated with high-vancomycin MICs. One explanation for a possible increase in mortality that has been suggested is the difficulty in achieving adequate vancomycin AUC—MIC ratios when S aureus isolates have an elevated MIC value. However, the fact that the mortality outcome was not increased in patients with high-vancomycin MICs who received vancomycin compared with those who did not receive vancomycin suggests that achievement of pharmacokinetic targets may not be an accurate predictor of mortality. Importantly, the meta-regression showed no mortality dose-effect based on increasing MICs when control mortality was evaluated as a continuous variable. The other possibility, a mortality decrease with high-vancomycin MICs, could be explained by the fact that strains with high-vancomycin MICs could be less virulent than strains with low-vancomycin MICs. This mortality reduction has been observed by others,46 as well as by this study’s results of the hVISA subanalysis which suggested a lower mortality with higher MICs.

Second, the current Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) vancomycin susceptibility breakpoints58 are necessarily somewhat subjective and may not accurately correlate with clinical outcomes, or the MIC values reported in the literature may be erroneous due to testing methodology.59 For example, MIC values have been shown to vary based on the testing method and duration of isolate storage.60

Third, outcomes of patients with SAB also are related to various clinical confounding factors such as source control (eg, removal of infected vascular catheters, drainage of abscesses) and these factors may be more important in determining mortality than the vancomycin MIC.61 In the regression analysis of this present study, a correlation between the level of mortality in the patients with SAB due to low-vancomycin MIC and the overall mortality of all patients in the study was noted. For every 1% increase in mortality in the low-vancomycin MIC group, there was a 0.45% decrease in the absolute RD between low- and high-vancomycin MIC groups. This may suggest underlying differences in severity of illness in the study population or differences related to features of care such as source control.

Fourth, elevations in vancomycin MIC appear to be associated with alterations in S aureus cellular function such as cell wall changes and transcriptional alterations that may modulate virulence and microbiologic fitness. For example, Soriano et al25 noted that patients infected with high-vancomycin MIC strains were less likely to experience hypotension and shock, while Holmes et al42 observed that elevations in vancomycin MIC appeared to be associated with outcomes even in patients infected with MSSA who were treated exclusively with semisynthetic penicillins. In support of this, infections due to hVISA, rather than being associated with increased mortality, may actually be associated with decreased mortality.46 A recent systematic review of hVISA infections found that despite being associated with increased rates of treatment failure, there was no association between hVISA infection and increased mortality.62 Thus, subtle increases in vancomycin MIC that continue to be within the susceptible range may be a surrogate marker for intrinsic microbiologic traits and not associated with worsened clinical outcomes.63

The findings of this meta-analysis differ from the findings from 3 previous ones.68 The difference in conclusions from other published meta-analyses may be related to differences in study design. The previous meta-analyses evaluated outcomes in patients with staphylococcal infections from various sites including skin and soft tissue, urinary tract, lungs, abdomen, and bloodstream. This would be predicted to result in significant clinical heterogeneity because mortality outcomes vary greatly between sites such as skin and soft-tissue infections and pneumonia. The present study was the first, to our knowledge, to prospectively include only patients with SAB; this improved clinical homogeneity made analysis more comparable from both the pathogenesis and clinical perspectives. In addition, the present study included the largest number of studies (N = 38) and SAB infection episodes (N = 8291) to date, which increased the statistical precision as seen by the narrow CIs. Moreover, other meta-analyses have not evaluated and adjusted for the relationship between mortality and important clinical comorbidities that commonly accompany SAB such as ICU hospitalization, presence of endocarditis, duration of bacteremia, previous vancomycin exposure, vancomycin trough levels, treatment with vancomycin, and baseline disease severity.

The findings of this study may have implications for clinical practice and public health: (1) the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) interpretive standards for vancomycin MIC most likely do not need to be lowered; (2) routine differentiation of MIC values between 1 mg/L and 2 mg/L appears unnecessary; and (3) the use of alternative antistaphylococcal agents may not be required for S aureus isolates with elevated but susceptible vancomycin MIC values. These conclusions are consistent with current Infectious Disease Society of America treatment guidelines that recommend use of vancomycin for treatment of MRSA bacteremia with consideration for alternative agents based on the patient’s clinical response and not the MIC.64 Investigational drugs thought to be alternatives to vancomycin should be assessed in well-designed and appropriately powered clinical trials. Rather than focusing on MIC values, clinicians providing care for patients with SAB should ensure that patients are evaluated for occult sources of infection, have drainable and removable sources of infection eliminated, and are treated for the appropriate duration of therapy.

This study should be interpreted in the context of several limitations. First, the clinical response to treatment was not assessed. The authors prospectively agreed to this approach based on the observational nonblinded nature of this assessment and its susceptibility to bias. In addition, the criteria used to assess clinical response varied substantially among studies, precluding appropriate pooling of the data. The choice to avoid the use of more ambiguous outcomes (ie, clinical response) and to prioritize the evaluation of the most clinically relevant and precisely measured outcome (ie, mortality) may have contributed to more reliability and generalizability to its findings. Second, the possibility that nonmortality outcomes may be associated with vancomycin MIC cannot be excluded. Third, most studies were retrospective in design, and this may have introduced inherent selection bias into this report. Fourth, the use of stored S aureus isolates for MIC measurement may affect MIC values. Ludwig et al65 found mean MIC values in 36 S aureus isolates decreased from 1.21 to 0.65 mg/L over 9 months of freezer storage. Changes such as these may affect MIC interpretation, particularly when values are within a narrow range of assessment (0.5-2.0 mg/L). Fifth, treatment choices were not standardized and varied between studies; however, when analyzed by use of vancomycin, this study found no association between vancomycin MIC values and mortality. Sixth, it was not possible to obtain severity of illness scores for all studies, but a clinically relevant surrogate marker—mortality rate in the low-vancomycin MIC group—was significantly associated with mortality in the high-vancomycin MIC group. Seventh, type 1 error cannot be excluded due to the multiple analyses performed for this study. Eighth, the 95% upper bound of CI of this study suggests that a potential higher mortality rate (≤5.6%) with high-vancomycin MIC may have not been detected by this study, and further studies are needed to evaluate the possibility of this increased risk and its potential clinical importance.

Some may reason that the best means to determine whether high-vancomycin MIC levels are associated with increased mortality would be by performing an adequately powered randomized clinical trial. However, such a clinical trial may not be advisable for the following reasons: (1) ethical issues: adding or withholding different antibiotic treatments based on arbitrary MIC cutoffs may not be permissible by ethical review committees; (2) logistical issues: a recent trial66 evaluating the efficacy of daptomycin for SAB conducted in 44 hospitals in several countries required nearly 3 years to randomize 246 patients; hence to enroll several thousand patients in such a trial most likely would require years; and (3) financial issues: the costs to design and execute a trial with thousands of patients infected with S aureus would be prohibitive to both pharmaceutical and governmental funding agencies.

In this meta-analysis of SAB episodes, there were no statistically significant differences in the risk of death when comparing patients with S aureus exhibiting high-vancomycin MIC (≥1.5 mg/L) vs those with low-vancomycin MIC (<1.5 mg/L), although the findings cannot definitely exclude an increased mortality risk. These findings should be considered when interpreting vancomycin susceptibility and in determining whether alternative antistaphylococcal agents are necessary for patients with SAB with elevated but susceptible vancomycin MIC values.

Corresponding Author: Andre C. Kalil, MD, MPH, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Disease, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 985400 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-5400 (akalil@unmc.edu).

Author Contributions: Dr Kalil had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: Kalil.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.

Drafting of the manuscript: All authors.

Administrative, technical, or material support: All authors.

Published Online: October 9, 2014. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.6364.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Dr Van Schooneveld reports receipt of research grants from Cubist, ViroPharma, and Actelion in the form of contracts to the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Dr Fey reports receipt of research grants from Biofire in the form of contracts to the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Dr Rupp reports receipt of research grants from 3M, Magnolia, and Mölnlycke in the form of contracts to the University of Nebraska Medical Center, and advisory board and consultant honoraria from 3M, Bard, Molnlycke, Artise, Trius. No other disclosures were reported.

Additional Contributions: The authors thank Ms Elaine Litton (University of Nebraska) for providing administrative support and Dr Cynthia Schmidt (University of Nebraska) for library support. Neither individual was compensated for specific contributions to this article.

Boyce  JM, Cookson  B, Christiansen  K,  et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusLancet Infect Dis. 2005;5(10):653-663.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ziakas  PD, Anagnostou  T, Mylonakis  E.  The prevalence and significance of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization at admission in the general ICU setting. Crit Care Med. 2013;42(2):433-444.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance in europe 2012. annual report of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (Ears-Net).http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/antimicrobial-resistance-surveillance-europe-2012.pdf. Accessed November 30, 2013.
Barnett  AG, Page  K, Campbell  M,  et al The increased risks of death and extra lengths of hospital and ICU stay from hospital-acquired bloodstream infections. BMJ Open. 2013;3(10):e003587.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Steinkraus  G, White  R, Friedrich  L.  Vancomycin MIC creep in non-vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA), vancomycin-susceptible clinical methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) blood isolates from 2001-05. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(4):788-794.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Lodise  TP, Paterson  DL.  The clinical significance of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration in Staphylococcus aureus infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(6):755-771.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mavros  MN, Tansarli  GS, Vardakas  KZ, Rafailidis  PI, Karageorgopoulos  DE, Falagas  ME.  Impact of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on clinical outcomes of patients with vancomycin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40(6):496-509.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jacob  JT, DiazGranados  CA.  High vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and clinical outcomes in adults with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Infect Dis. 2013;17(2):e93-e100.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wells  G, Shea  B, O'Connell  D;  et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses.http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed June 6, 2014.
DerSimonian  R, Laird  N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177-188.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Borenstein  M, Hedges  LV, Higgins  JPT, Rothstein  HR. Identifying and quantifying heterogeneity. In: Introduction to Meta-analysis. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
Borenstein  M, Hedges  LV, Higgins  JP, Rothstein  H. Meta-regression. In: Introduction to Meta-analysis. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
Stroup  DF, Berlin  JA, Morton  SC,  et al; Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group.  Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008-2012.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moher  D, Liberati  A, Tetzlaff  J, Altman  DG; PRISMA Group.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mulrow  CD, Cook  D. Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Health Care Decisions. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American College of Physicians; 1998.
Sterne  JA, Gavaghan  D, Egger  M.  Publication and related bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(11):1119-1129.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Begg  CB, Mazumdar  M.  Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088-1101.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schwaber  MJ, Wright  SB, Carmeli  Y,  et al.  Clinical implications of varying degrees of vancomycin susceptibility in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9(6):657-664.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Charles  PG, Ward  PB, Johnson  PD, Howden  BP, Grayson  ML.  Clinical features associated with bacteremia due to heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureusClin Infect Dis. 2004;38(3):448-451.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Howden  BP, Ward  PB, Charles  PG,  et al.  Treatment outcomes for serious infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38(4):521-528.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Maor  Y, Rahav  G, Belausov  N, Ben-David  D, Smollan  G, Keller  N.  Prevalence and characteristics of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in a tertiary care center. J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45(5):1511-1514.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Neoh  HM, Hori  S, Komatsu  M,  et al.  Impact of reduced vancomycin susceptibility on the therapeutic outcome of MRSA bloodstream infections. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2007;6:13.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liao  CH, Chen  SY, Huang  YT, Hsueh  PR.  Outcome of patients with meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia at an emergency department of a medical centre in Taiwan. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008;32(4):326-332.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lodise  TP, Graves  J, Evans  A,  et al.  Relationship between vancomycin MIC and failure among patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia treated with vancomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52(9):3315-3320.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Soriano  A, Marco  F, Martínez  JA,  et al.  Influence of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46(2):193-200.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bae  IG, Federspiel  JJ, Miró  JM,  et al; International Collaboration on Endocarditis-Microbiology Investigator.  Heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate susceptibility phenotype in bloodstream methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from an international cohort of patients with infective endocarditis. J Infect Dis. 2009;200(9):1355-1366.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fong  RK, Low  J, Koh  TH, Kurup  A.  Clinical features and treatment outcomes of vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) and heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (hVISA) in a tertiary care institution in Singapore. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009;28(8):983-987.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jang  HC, Kim  SH, Kim  KH,  et al.  Salvage treatment for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49(3):395-401.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Maor  Y, Hagin  M, Belausov  N, Keller  N, Ben-David  D, Rahav  G.  Clinical features of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia versus those of methicillin-resistant S aureus bacteremia. J Infect Dis. 2009;199(5):619-624.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Musta  AC, Riederer  K, Shemes  S,  et al.  Vancomycin MIC plus heteroresistance and outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47(6):1640-1644.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Price  J, Atkinson  S, Llewelyn  M, Paul  J.  Paradoxical relationship between the clinical outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and the minimum inhibitory concentration of vancomycin. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48(7):997-998.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lalueza  A, Chaves  F, San Juan  R, Daskalaki  M, Otero  JR, Aguado  JM.  Is high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration a good marker to predict the outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia? J Infect Dis. 2010;201(2):311-312.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lewis  T, Chaudhry  R, Nightingale  P, Lambert  P, Das  I.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Int J Infect Dis. 2011;15(2):e131-e135.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lin  SH, Liao  WH, Lai  CC,  et al.  Risk factors for mortality in patients with persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in a tertiary care hospital in Taiwan. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(8):1792-1798.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moore  CL, Osaki-Kiyan  P, Perri  M,  et al.  USA600 (ST45) methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections in urban Detroit. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(6):2307-2310.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Neuner  EA, Casabar  E, Reichley  R, McKinnon  PS.  Clinical, microbiologic, and genetic determinants of persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010;67(3):228-233.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Takesue  Y, Nakajima  K, Takahashi  Y,  et al.  Clinical characteristics of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration of 2 μg/ml methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from patients with bacteremia. J Infect Chemother. 2011;17(1):52-57.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wang  JL, Wang  JT, Sheng  WH, Chen  YC, Chang  SC.  Nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia in Taiwan. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;7(10):159.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Aguado  JM, San-Juan  R, Lalueza  A,  et al.  High vancomycin MIC and complicated methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17(6):1099-1102.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Clemens  EC, Chan  JD, Lynch  JB, Dellit  TH.  Relationships between vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration, dosing strategies, and outcomes in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;71(4):408-414.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
de Sanctis  JT, Swami  A, Sawarynski  K,  et al.  Is there a clinical association of vancomycin MIC creep, agr group II locus, and treatment failure in MRSA bacteremia? Diagn Mol Pathol. 2011;20(3):184-188.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Holmes  NE, Turnidge  JD, Munckhof  WJ,  et al.  Antibiotic choice may not explain poorer outcomes in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations. J Infect Dis. 2011;204(3):340-347.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Honda  H, Doern  CD, Michael-Dunne  W  Jr,, Warren  DK.  The impact of vancomycin susceptibility on treatment outcomes among patients with methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2011;5(11):335.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Khatib  R, Jose  J, Musta  A,  et al.  Relevance of vancomycin-intermediate susceptibility and heteroresistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(7):1594-1599.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schweizer  ML, Furuno  JP, Sakoulas  G,  et al.  Increased mortality with accessory gene regulator (agr) dysfunction in Staphylococcus aureus among bacteremic patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(3):1082-1087.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Jones  M, Gosbell  IB, Paterson  DL.  Vancomycin heteroresistance is associated with reduced mortality in ST239 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus blood stream infections. PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e21217.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Walraven  CJ, North  MS, Marr-Lyon  L, Deming  P, Sakoulas  G, Mercier  RC.  Site of infection rather than vancomycin MIC predicts vancomycin treatment failure in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(10):2386-2392.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Chen  SY, Liao  CH, Wang  JL,  et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec genotype effects outcomes of patients with healthcare-associated MRSA bacteremia independently of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55(10):1329-1337.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Han  JH, Mascitti  KB, Edelstein  PH, Bilker  WB, Lautenbach  E.  Effect of reduced vancomycin susceptibility on clinical and economic outcomes in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(10):5164-5170.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Miller  CE, Batra  R, Cooper  BS,  et al.  An association between bacterial genotype combined with a high-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and risk of endocarditis in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(5):591-600.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rojas  L, Bunsow  E, Munoz  P, Cercenado  E, Rodriguez-Creixems  M, Bouza  E. Vancomycin MICs do not predict the outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections in correctly treated patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(7):1760-1768.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yeh  YC, Yeh  KM, Lin  TY,  et al.  Impact of vancomycin MIC creep on patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2012;45(3):214-220.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gasch  O, Camoez  M, Dominguez  MA,  et al; REIPI/GEIH Study Groups.  Predictive factors for mortality in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013;19(11):1049-1057.
PubMed
Kan  LP, Lin  JC, Chiu  SK,  et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in hemodialysis and nondialysis patients. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2014;47(1):15-22.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yoon  YK, Park  DW, Sohn  JW,  et al.  Multicenter prospective observational study of the comparative efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin in patients with health care-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(1):317-324.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Patel  N, Pai  MP, Rodvold  KA, Lomaestro  B, Drusano  GL, Lodise  TP.  Vancomycin: we can’t get there from here. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(8):969-974.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Roberts  JA, Taccone  FS, Udy  AA, Vincent  JL, Jacobs  F, Lipman  J.  Vancomycin dosing in critically ill patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(6):2704-2709.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M100-S23 performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty-third informational supplement.http://clsi.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2013/07/FDA_CrossWalk_Web1.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2014.
Edwards  B, Milne  K, Lawes  T, Cook  I, Robb  A, Gould  IM.  Is vancomycin MIC “creep” method dependent? J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(2):318-325.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pitz  AM, Yu  F, Hermsen  ED, Rupp  ME, Fey  PD, Olsen  KM.  Vancomycin susceptibility trends and prevalence of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus in clinical methicillin-resistant S aureus isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49(1):269-274.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Jensen  SO, Vaska  VL, Espedido  BA, Paterson  DL, Gosbell  IB.  Predictors of mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2012;25(2):362-386.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Patterson  DL.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the significance of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(1):405-410.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cameron  DR, Ward  DV, Kostoulias  X,  et al.  Serine/threonine phosphatase Stp1 contributes to reduced susceptibility to vancomycin and virulence in Staphylococcus aureusJ Infect Dis. 2012;205(11):1677-1687.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liu  C, Bayer  A, Cosgrove  SE,  et al.  Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(3):285-292.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ludwig  F, Edwards  B, Lawes  T, Gould  IM.  Effects of storage on vancomycin and daptomycin MIC in susceptible blood isolates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusJ Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(10):3383-3387.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fowler  VG  Jr,, Boucher  HW, Corey  GR,  et al Daptomycin vs standard therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis caused by Staphylococcus aureusN Engl J Med. 2006;355(7):653-665.
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
Study Selection for for Vancomycin MIC and Mortality in Patients With Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

MIC indicates minimum inhibitory concentration.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.
Risk Difference for Overall Mortality for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3.
Risk Difference for Hospital, 30-Day, and Overall Mortality for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 4.
Mortality by Different MIC Cutoffs and Overall for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 5.
Mortality by Assay Type and Overall for High-Vancomycin MIC vs Low-Vancomycin MIC

BMD indicates broth microdilution; Etest, epsilometer test. High-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was defined as greater than or equal to 1.5 ug/mL. The size of each data marker indicates the relative weight of each study.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1.  Vancomycin MIC and Mortality in Patients With S aureus Bacteremia Studies, 2003-2010a
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2.  Vancomycin MIC and Mortality in Patients With S aureus Bacteremia Studies, 2011-2014a

References

Boyce  JM, Cookson  B, Christiansen  K,  et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusLancet Infect Dis. 2005;5(10):653-663.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ziakas  PD, Anagnostou  T, Mylonakis  E.  The prevalence and significance of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization at admission in the general ICU setting. Crit Care Med. 2013;42(2):433-444.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance in europe 2012. annual report of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (Ears-Net).http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/antimicrobial-resistance-surveillance-europe-2012.pdf. Accessed November 30, 2013.
Barnett  AG, Page  K, Campbell  M,  et al The increased risks of death and extra lengths of hospital and ICU stay from hospital-acquired bloodstream infections. BMJ Open. 2013;3(10):e003587.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Steinkraus  G, White  R, Friedrich  L.  Vancomycin MIC creep in non-vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA), vancomycin-susceptible clinical methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) blood isolates from 2001-05. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(4):788-794.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Lodise  TP, Paterson  DL.  The clinical significance of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration in Staphylococcus aureus infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(6):755-771.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mavros  MN, Tansarli  GS, Vardakas  KZ, Rafailidis  PI, Karageorgopoulos  DE, Falagas  ME.  Impact of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on clinical outcomes of patients with vancomycin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40(6):496-509.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jacob  JT, DiazGranados  CA.  High vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and clinical outcomes in adults with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Infect Dis. 2013;17(2):e93-e100.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wells  G, Shea  B, O'Connell  D;  et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses.http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed June 6, 2014.
DerSimonian  R, Laird  N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177-188.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Borenstein  M, Hedges  LV, Higgins  JPT, Rothstein  HR. Identifying and quantifying heterogeneity. In: Introduction to Meta-analysis. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
Borenstein  M, Hedges  LV, Higgins  JP, Rothstein  H. Meta-regression. In: Introduction to Meta-analysis. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
Stroup  DF, Berlin  JA, Morton  SC,  et al; Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group.  Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008-2012.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moher  D, Liberati  A, Tetzlaff  J, Altman  DG; PRISMA Group.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mulrow  CD, Cook  D. Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Health Care Decisions. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American College of Physicians; 1998.
Sterne  JA, Gavaghan  D, Egger  M.  Publication and related bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(11):1119-1129.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Begg  CB, Mazumdar  M.  Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088-1101.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schwaber  MJ, Wright  SB, Carmeli  Y,  et al.  Clinical implications of varying degrees of vancomycin susceptibility in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9(6):657-664.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Charles  PG, Ward  PB, Johnson  PD, Howden  BP, Grayson  ML.  Clinical features associated with bacteremia due to heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureusClin Infect Dis. 2004;38(3):448-451.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Howden  BP, Ward  PB, Charles  PG,  et al.  Treatment outcomes for serious infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38(4):521-528.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Maor  Y, Rahav  G, Belausov  N, Ben-David  D, Smollan  G, Keller  N.  Prevalence and characteristics of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in a tertiary care center. J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45(5):1511-1514.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Neoh  HM, Hori  S, Komatsu  M,  et al.  Impact of reduced vancomycin susceptibility on the therapeutic outcome of MRSA bloodstream infections. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2007;6:13.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liao  CH, Chen  SY, Huang  YT, Hsueh  PR.  Outcome of patients with meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia at an emergency department of a medical centre in Taiwan. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008;32(4):326-332.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lodise  TP, Graves  J, Evans  A,  et al.  Relationship between vancomycin MIC and failure among patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia treated with vancomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52(9):3315-3320.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Soriano  A, Marco  F, Martínez  JA,  et al.  Influence of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46(2):193-200.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bae  IG, Federspiel  JJ, Miró  JM,  et al; International Collaboration on Endocarditis-Microbiology Investigator.  Heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate susceptibility phenotype in bloodstream methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from an international cohort of patients with infective endocarditis. J Infect Dis. 2009;200(9):1355-1366.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fong  RK, Low  J, Koh  TH, Kurup  A.  Clinical features and treatment outcomes of vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) and heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (hVISA) in a tertiary care institution in Singapore. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009;28(8):983-987.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jang  HC, Kim  SH, Kim  KH,  et al.  Salvage treatment for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49(3):395-401.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Maor  Y, Hagin  M, Belausov  N, Keller  N, Ben-David  D, Rahav  G.  Clinical features of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia versus those of methicillin-resistant S aureus bacteremia. J Infect Dis. 2009;199(5):619-624.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Musta  AC, Riederer  K, Shemes  S,  et al.  Vancomycin MIC plus heteroresistance and outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47(6):1640-1644.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Price  J, Atkinson  S, Llewelyn  M, Paul  J.  Paradoxical relationship between the clinical outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and the minimum inhibitory concentration of vancomycin. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48(7):997-998.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lalueza  A, Chaves  F, San Juan  R, Daskalaki  M, Otero  JR, Aguado  JM.  Is high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration a good marker to predict the outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia? J Infect Dis. 2010;201(2):311-312.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lewis  T, Chaudhry  R, Nightingale  P, Lambert  P, Das  I.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Int J Infect Dis. 2011;15(2):e131-e135.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lin  SH, Liao  WH, Lai  CC,  et al.  Risk factors for mortality in patients with persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in a tertiary care hospital in Taiwan. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(8):1792-1798.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moore  CL, Osaki-Kiyan  P, Perri  M,  et al.  USA600 (ST45) methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections in urban Detroit. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(6):2307-2310.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Neuner  EA, Casabar  E, Reichley  R, McKinnon  PS.  Clinical, microbiologic, and genetic determinants of persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010;67(3):228-233.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Takesue  Y, Nakajima  K, Takahashi  Y,  et al.  Clinical characteristics of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration of 2 μg/ml methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from patients with bacteremia. J Infect Chemother. 2011;17(1):52-57.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wang  JL, Wang  JT, Sheng  WH, Chen  YC, Chang  SC.  Nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia in Taiwan. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;7(10):159.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Aguado  JM, San-Juan  R, Lalueza  A,  et al.  High vancomycin MIC and complicated methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17(6):1099-1102.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Clemens  EC, Chan  JD, Lynch  JB, Dellit  TH.  Relationships between vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration, dosing strategies, and outcomes in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;71(4):408-414.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
de Sanctis  JT, Swami  A, Sawarynski  K,  et al.  Is there a clinical association of vancomycin MIC creep, agr group II locus, and treatment failure in MRSA bacteremia? Diagn Mol Pathol. 2011;20(3):184-188.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Holmes  NE, Turnidge  JD, Munckhof  WJ,  et al.  Antibiotic choice may not explain poorer outcomes in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations. J Infect Dis. 2011;204(3):340-347.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Honda  H, Doern  CD, Michael-Dunne  W  Jr,, Warren  DK.  The impact of vancomycin susceptibility on treatment outcomes among patients with methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2011;5(11):335.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Khatib  R, Jose  J, Musta  A,  et al.  Relevance of vancomycin-intermediate susceptibility and heteroresistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(7):1594-1599.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schweizer  ML, Furuno  JP, Sakoulas  G,  et al.  Increased mortality with accessory gene regulator (agr) dysfunction in Staphylococcus aureus among bacteremic patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(3):1082-1087.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Jones  M, Gosbell  IB, Paterson  DL.  Vancomycin heteroresistance is associated with reduced mortality in ST239 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus blood stream infections. PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e21217.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Walraven  CJ, North  MS, Marr-Lyon  L, Deming  P, Sakoulas  G, Mercier  RC.  Site of infection rather than vancomycin MIC predicts vancomycin treatment failure in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(10):2386-2392.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Chen  SY, Liao  CH, Wang  JL,  et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec genotype effects outcomes of patients with healthcare-associated MRSA bacteremia independently of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55(10):1329-1337.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Han  JH, Mascitti  KB, Edelstein  PH, Bilker  WB, Lautenbach  E.  Effect of reduced vancomycin susceptibility on clinical and economic outcomes in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(10):5164-5170.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Miller  CE, Batra  R, Cooper  BS,  et al.  An association between bacterial genotype combined with a high-vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and risk of endocarditis in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(5):591-600.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rojas  L, Bunsow  E, Munoz  P, Cercenado  E, Rodriguez-Creixems  M, Bouza  E. Vancomycin MICs do not predict the outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections in correctly treated patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(7):1760-1768.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yeh  YC, Yeh  KM, Lin  TY,  et al.  Impact of vancomycin MIC creep on patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2012;45(3):214-220.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gasch  O, Camoez  M, Dominguez  MA,  et al; REIPI/GEIH Study Groups.  Predictive factors for mortality in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013;19(11):1049-1057.
PubMed
Kan  LP, Lin  JC, Chiu  SK,  et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in hemodialysis and nondialysis patients. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2014;47(1):15-22.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yoon  YK, Park  DW, Sohn  JW,  et al.  Multicenter prospective observational study of the comparative efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin in patients with health care-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(1):317-324.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Patel  N, Pai  MP, Rodvold  KA, Lomaestro  B, Drusano  GL, Lodise  TP.  Vancomycin: we can’t get there from here. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(8):969-974.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Roberts  JA, Taccone  FS, Udy  AA, Vincent  JL, Jacobs  F, Lipman  J.  Vancomycin dosing in critically ill patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(6):2704-2709.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M100-S23 performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty-third informational supplement.http://clsi.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2013/07/FDA_CrossWalk_Web1.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2014.
Edwards  B, Milne  K, Lawes  T, Cook  I, Robb  A, Gould  IM.  Is vancomycin MIC “creep” method dependent? J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(2):318-325.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pitz  AM, Yu  F, Hermsen  ED, Rupp  ME, Fey  PD, Olsen  KM.  Vancomycin susceptibility trends and prevalence of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus in clinical methicillin-resistant S aureus isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49(1):269-274.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Jensen  SO, Vaska  VL, Espedido  BA, Paterson  DL, Gosbell  IB.  Predictors of mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2012;25(2):362-386.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Hal  SJ, Patterson  DL.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the significance of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(1):405-410.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cameron  DR, Ward  DV, Kostoulias  X,  et al.  Serine/threonine phosphatase Stp1 contributes to reduced susceptibility to vancomycin and virulence in Staphylococcus aureusJ Infect Dis. 2012;205(11):1677-1687.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Liu  C, Bayer  A, Cosgrove  SE,  et al.  Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(3):285-292.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ludwig  F, Edwards  B, Lawes  T, Gould  IM.  Effects of storage on vancomycin and daptomycin MIC in susceptible blood isolates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusJ Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(10):3383-3387.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fowler  VG  Jr,, Boucher  HW, Corey  GR,  et al Daptomycin vs standard therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis caused by Staphylococcus aureusN Engl J Med. 2006;355(7):653-665.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Supplement.

eAppendix 1. Literature Search Strategy

eTable 1. MOOSE Guidelines Checklist

eFigure 1. Vancomycin High (=1.5) versus Low MIC (<1.5): Publication Year and Overall Mortality

eFigure 2. Vancomycin High (=1.5) versus Low MIC (<1.5): Quality of Study and Overall Mortality

eReferences. For eFigures 1 and 2

eFigure 3. Vancomycin High MIC (=1.5) versus Low MIC (<1.5) (38 studies): Metaregression of Overall Mortality Risk Difference by Control Mortality (Low MIC)

eAppendix 2. Meta-regression Equations

eTable 2. Meta-regression Variables

Supplemental Content

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

15,149 Views
30 Citations
×

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs