Munoz, P.De la Villa, S.Martinez-Selles, M.Goenaga, M. A.Reviejo-Jaka, K.Arnaiz de las Revillas, F.Garcia-Cuello, L.Hidalgo-Tenorio, C.Rodriguez-Esteban, M. A.Antorrena, ICastelo-Corral, L.Garcia-Vazquez, E.De la Torre, J.Bouza, E.Spanish Collaboration EndocarditisGrp Apoyo Manejo Endocarditis Infe2025-01-072025-01-072021-12-230025-7974https://hdl.handle.net/10668/26477Current data on the frequency and efficacy of linezolid (LNZ) in infective endocarditis (IE) are based on small retrospective series. We used a national database to evaluate the effectiveness of LNZ in IE. This is a retrospective study of IE patients in the Spanish GAMES database who received LNZ. We defined 3 levels of therapeutic impact: LNZ = 7 days, > 50% of the total treatment, and > 50% of the LNZ doses prescribed in the first weeks of treatment), and LNZ >= 7 days not fulfilling the high-impact criteria (LNZ-NHI). Effectiveness of LNZ was assessed using propensity score matching and multivariate analysis of high-impact cases in comparison to patients not treated with LNZ from the GAMES database matched for age-adjusted comorbidity Charlson index, heart failure, renal failure, prosthetic and intracardiac IE device, left-sided IE, and Staphylococcus aureus. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included IE complications and relapses. From 3467 patients included in the GAMES database, 295 (8.5%) received LNZ. After excluding 3 patients, 292 were grouped as follows for the analyses: 99 (33.9%) patients in LNZ 50% of the total treatment, and > 50% of the LNZ doses prescribed in the first weeks of treatment), and LNZ >= 7 days not fulfilling the high-impact criteria (LNZ-NHI). Effectiveness of LNZ was assessed using propensity score matching and multivariate analysis of high-impact cases in comparison to patients not treated with LNZ from the GAMES database matched for age-adjusted comorbidity Charlson index, heart failure, renal failure, prosthetic and intracardiac IE device, left-sided IE, and Staphylococcus aureus. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included IE complications and relapses. From 3467 patients included in the GAMES database, 295 (8.5%) received LNZ. After excluding 3 patients, 292 were grouped as follows for the analyses: 99 (33.9%) patients in LNZ 50% of the LNZ doses prescribed in the first weeks of treatment), and LNZ >= 7 days not fulfilling the high-impact criteria (LNZ-NHI). Effectiveness of LNZ was assessed using propensity score matching and multivariate analysis of high-impact cases in comparison to patients not treated with LNZ from the GAMES database matched for age-adjusted comorbidity Charlson index, heart failure, renal failure, prosthetic and intracardiac IE device, left-sided IE, and Staphylococcus aureus. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included IE complications and relapses. From 3467 patients included in the GAMES database, 295 (8.5%) received LNZ. After excluding 3 patients, 292 were grouped as follows for the analyses: 99 (33.9%) patients in LNZ = 7 days not fulfilling the high-impact criteria (LNZ-NHI). Effectiveness of LNZ was assessed using propensity score matching and multivariate analysis of high-impact cases in comparison to patients not treated with LNZ from the GAMES database matched for age-adjusted comorbidity Charlson index, heart failure, renal failure, prosthetic and intracardiac IE device, left-sided IE, and Staphylococcus aureus. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included IE complications and relapses. From 3467 patients included in the GAMES database, 295 (8.5%) received LNZ. After excluding 3 patients, 292 were grouped as follows for the analyses: 99 (33.9%) patients in LNZenAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Enterococcusinfective endocarditislinezolidmortalityStaphylococcusComplicated skinResistantTherapyVancomycinManagementBacteremiaDiagnosisEfficacyresearch article34941026open access10.1097/MD.00000000000275971536-5964https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000027597733564800003