2026/05/11 by Alberto Enrico Maraolo, Mariano Nobile, Ivan Gentile · 1 voice
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology · Immunology and Microbiology · Medicine · #Antibiotic Use and Resistance #Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus #Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
paper · doi:10.1080/07853890.2026.2667672
openalex publication_date 2026/05/11 · openalex created_date 2026/05/12 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/18
BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) by methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, traditionally treated with antistaphylococcal penicillins (ASPs) or cefazolin. Ceftriaxone has emerged as an alternative due to its once-daily dosing regimen and favourable safety profile; however, its efficacy compared to the standard of care (SoC) remains controversial. This evidence synthesis aimed to assess the role of ceftriaxone in treating MSSA-BSIs. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus up to December 31, 2025 (PROSPERO protocol CRD42024595748). Studies comparing ceftriaxone to ASPs or cefazolin for MSSA-BSIs were included. Primary outcomes were 30-day and 90-day all-cause mortality . Pooled effect sizes with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated using random-effects models, odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) according to the type of outcome. RESULTS: Eleven studies totalling 2,568 patients were included. Ceftriaxone was associated with significantly increased 30-day mortality (OR 3.33; 95% CI: 2.17-5.10), although differences at 90 days were not significant (OR 1.71; 95% CI: 0.75-3.90). No significant differences were noted for clinical success (OR 0.49; 95% CI: 0.19-1.26), microbiological clearance (OR 1.66; 95% CI: 0.73-3.82). Adverse event rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Given the availability of various alternatives and the consistent short-term mortality signal observed, routine use of ceftriaxone for MSSA-BSIs, especially as initial therapy, is not supported by current evidence. Only novel findings from randomized studies may change the place in therapy of the drug in this context.