Comparison of Mortality Risk Associated With Bacteremia Due to Methicillin‐Resistant and Methicillin‐Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus
Objective. To quantify the clinical impact of methicillin‐resistance in Staphylococcus aureus causing infection complicated by bacteremia in adult patients, while controlling for the severity of patients’ underlying illnesses.
Design. Retrospective cohort study from October 1, 1995, through December 31, 2003.
Patients and Setting. A total of 438 patients with S. aureus infection complicated by bacteremia from a single Veterans Affairs healthcare system.
Results. We found that 193 (44%) of the 438 patients had methicillin‐resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infection and 114 (26%) died of causes attributable to S. aureus infection within 90 days after the infection was identified. Patients with MRSA infection had a higher mortality risk, compared with patients with methicillin‐susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) infections (relative risk, 1.7 [95% confidence interval, 1.3‐2.4];
), except for patients with pneumonia (relative risk, 0.7 [95% confidence interval, 0.4‐1.3]). Patients with MRSA infections were significantly older (
), had more underlying diseases (
), and were more likely to have severe sepsis in response to their infection (
) compared with patients with MSSA bacteremia. Patients who died within 90 days after S. aureus infection was identified were significantly older (
) and more likely to have severe sepsis (
) and pneumonia (
), compared with patients who survived. After adjusting for age as a confounder, comorbidities, and pneumonia as an effect modifier, S. aureus infection–related mortality remained significantly higher in patients with MRSA infection than in those with MSSA infection, among those without pneumonia (hazard ratio, 1.8 [95% confidence interval, 1.2‐3.0]);
.
Conclusions. The results of this study suggest that patients with MRSA infections other than pneumonia have a higher mortality risk than patients with MSSA infections other than pneumonia, independent of the severity of patients' underlying illnesses.
Received November 2, 2005; accepted February 27, 2006; electronically published February 15, 2007.
Staphylococcus aureus is a virulent bacterium and a common cause of both community‐acquired and hospital‐acquired infections.1‐3 S. aureus infections have become progressively more difficult to treat because of the development of antibiotic resistance, first to penicillin in the 1950s and then to methicillin in the 1960s. Currently, the antibiotic of choice for infections due to methicillin‐resistant S. aureus (MRSA) is vancomycin; however, despite adequate antibiotic therapy, patients with MRSA infections have a higher mortality risk and higher healthcare costs than patients with methicillin‐susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) infections.4,5 A recent meta‐analysis of 31 published studies6 demonstrated a significant increase (40%) in mortality among patients who had MRSA bacteremia compared with patients who had MSSA bacteremia. However, almost all studies have shown that infections due to MRSA occur in sicker patients,7 suggesting that differences in mortality risk may be, at least in part, caused by the patients' underlying illnesses. In general, studies have not accounted for this difference in the patients' underlying illnesses. Our study objective was to quantify the clinical impact of methicillin resistance in S. aureus infections complicated by bacteremia in adults, while controlling for their underlying illnesses.
Methods
Setting and Patient Population
All patients in the Veterans Affairs Maryland Health Care System (VAMHCS) who had S. aureus infections complicated by bacteremia during the period October 1, 1995, through December 31, 2003, were identified from microbiology records. Infection control nurses abstracted information on demographic characteristics, medical history, treatment, laboratory data, and outcomes from the comprehensive electronic medical record. We included veterans with a healthcare encounter at the VAMHCS who had at least 1 blood culture positive for S. aureus, which represented their first S. aureus infection. We excluded polymicrobial infections in which 2 or more organisms were isolated.
Outcome
The primary outcome of interest was death within 90 days after the date of the first blood culture result positive for S. aureus, regardless of whether the patient was an inpatient or outpatient. If the patient died within 90 days after the infection was identified, we assessed whether the S. aureus infection caused the death (ie, whether there was evidence of ongoing infection at the time of death) or contributed to the death (ie, whether the patient died of an underlying condition that was exacerbated by the infection). All other deaths were classified as not related to infection due to S. aureus.
Patient Characteristics
The Charlson comorbidity index was retrospectively calculated for each patient from recorded information so that it represented the patient’s condition at the time of admission8,9 on the basis of comorbidities listed in the admission history and physical examination reports. The Charlson comorbidity index is a method for scoring comorbid conditions that was developed to predict mortality within 1 year in hospitalized patients.
Infection Characteristics
An episode of S. aureus infection complicated by bacteremia was considered to be hospital acquired if the first blood culture samples positive for S. aureus were obtained 48 hours or more after admission, if the infection was vascular catheter associated, or if the patient was transferred from another facility and the first blood culture samples positive for S. aureus were obtained within 48 hours after admission to the VAMHCS. All other cases of S. aureus infection were considered community acquired. Sepsis at the time of bacteremia was defined according to the American College of Chest Physicians and Society of Critical Care Medicine criteria.10 To identify the cause of the bacteremia, the source was classified as primary if there was no secondary source. Primary bacteremia cases were further classified as central line–associated if a central line was in place in the 48 hours before the first blood culture samples positive for S. aureus were obtained. A secondary source of infection (eg, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and/or soft tissue infection) was defined using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for secondary nosocomial infections.11 For example, patients with pneumonia had to meet the CDC definition of pneumonia and have S. aureus isolated from a sputum culture.11 The duration of bacteremia was calculated from the date of the first blood culture result positive for S. aureus to the date of the last culture result positive for S. aureus during antibiotic treatment for infection. Patients who met the Duke criteria for definite or possible endocarditis were presumed to have endocarditis.12
Treatment Characteristics
The number of days to effective antibiotic therapy was calculated from the date of the first blood culture positive for S. aureus to the date of the first receipt of an effective antibiotic treatment. We also recorded whether the central line was removed from patients with central line–associated primary bloodstream infection and whether other implanted hardware was removed from patients in whom the implanted hardware was the secondary source of infection (eg, an infection associated with a total knee prosthesis). In cases of infection associated with either a central vascular catheter or hardware, if the catheter or hardware was not removed, then the focus of infection was considered not to have been removed.
Statistical Analysis
Categorical variables were analyzed using the χ2 test and the Fisher exact test, and continuous variables were analyzed using the Student t test for normally distributed continuous variables. Continuous variables that were nonnormally distributed were categorized. Effect modification was defined by a Breslow‐Day test statistic for homogeneity with statistical significance set at a P value of less than .01.13 Confounding was defined as a change in the relative risk (RR) of 10% or more relative to the unadjusted RR.
We used multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression to evaluate the association between MRSA infection and time to S. aureus infection–related death, while adjusting for identified effect‐modifying and confounding variables. Independent variables were evaluated for adherence to the proportional hazards assumption and examined for effect modification by including appropriate interaction terms.14 All tests were 2‐sided and P values less than .05 were defined as statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS statistical software, version 8.1 for Windows (SAS Institute).
Results
General Data
Of the 484 patients with S. aureus infection complicated by bacteremia, we excluded 46 patients who had polymicrobial infections. Thus, 438 patients remained in the study population. The study patients were predominantly male (99%) and African American (58%), and had a mean age of 63 years. Forty‐four percent of the study patients had MRSA infection. A total of 250 patients died in the 90‐day period after their infection was identified; however, only 114 (26%) died of causes attributable to S. aureus infection.
Methicillin Resistance
Table 1 compares patients with MRSA infection and patients with MSSA infection. Compared with patients with MSSA infection, patients with MRSA infection were significantly older, more likely to be white, and had a higher risk of death within a year as judged by a higher Charlson comorbidity index. Patients with MRSA infection were more likely to have severe sepsis, a hospital‐acquired infection, secondary bacteremia, pneumonia, and a longer interval before receipt of effective antibiotic treatment compared with patients with MSSA infections. Patients with MRSA infection were also less likely to have endocarditis than patients with MSSA infection.
S. aureus–Infection Related Mortality
Table 2 compares patients who did and patients who did not die of their S. aureus infections within 90 days after the infection was identified. Patients who died of their S. aureus infection were more likely to have severe sepsis, had a higher Charlson comorbidity index, had more days of bacteremia, and were more likely to have pneumonia compared with those who survived. They were also older and more likely to be white. Overall, no difference was found in the time to receipt of effective therapy between those who died and those who survived (0.98 vs 0.99 days;
, t test). Among patients with hospital‐acquired infection, the time to receipt of effective therapy was significantly shorter among those who died, compared with those who survived. In comparison, among patients with community‐acquired infection, the time to receipt of effective therapy was longer among patients who died than among those who survived, although the difference was not statistically significant (
). Overall, patients with MRSA infection had a 1.7 times greater risk of dying, compared with patients with MSSA infection (RR, 1.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3‐2.4];
).
Identification of Effect Modification and Confounding Variables
Pneumonia was the only variable that modified the effect of MRSA infection on mortality (
; Breslow‐Day test). Among patients without pneumonia, the risk of mortality for patients with MRSA infection was 2.4 times greater than the risk of mortality for patients with MSSA infections (RR, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.6‐3.8];
). Among patients with pneumonia, the risk of mortality was not significantly different between patients with MRSA infection and patients with MSSA infection (RR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.4‐1.3];
). We found that age was a potential confounder of the association between MRSA infection and 90‐day S. aureus infection–related mortality (data not shown).
Survival and Cox Regression Analysis
Table 3 gives the sequential Cox proportional hazard models that assess the association between MRSA infection and infection‐related mortality among patients as we added variables to the model. After adjusting for patient characteristics, such as age, that were independently associated with mortality, in patients without pneumonia the hazard ratio for dying from MRSA infection remained significantly greater than that for death from MSSA infection. We did not include the Charlson comorbidity index, type of infection (hospital acquired vs community acquired), or source of infection (primary vs secondary infection) in the final model, because their presence (individually or as a group) did not alter the hazard ratio between MRSA infection and S. aureus infection‐related death (data not shown).
Discussion
Multiple studies have shown that patients with MRSA infection have an increased mortality risk compared with patients with MSSA infection.4,6,14‐21 However, most studies have also shown that infections due to MRSA occur in sicker patients than do infections due to MSSA, suggesting that differences in mortality risk may be due to underlying illnesses.20 Our results suggest that patients with MRSA infections have a higher mortality risk than patients with MSSA infections, independent of the patients' underlying illnesses, although underlying illnesses account for a significant proportion of the difference in mortality risk.
We also found that patients with pneumonia did not have an increased risk of dying from MRSA infection, whereas patients without pneumonia had a significant risk of dying from MRSA infection compared with patients with MSSA infection. In epidemiologic terms, we found that pneumonia modifies the effect of MRSA infection on infection‐related mortality. Among patients with pneumonia, the infection‐related mortality did not differ between patients with MRSA infection and patients with MSSA infection. This finding is consistent with the results obtained by other investigators,22‐24 who have not found an increased risk of death from MRSA infection among patients with S. aureus pneumonia. In our study, identification of and subsequent adjustment for this interaction were important, because they increased the RR of mortality due to MRSA infection from 1.7 to 2.4.
Patients' underlying illnesses are only partially responsible for the increase in related mortality; thus, the difference in mortality risk could be the result of differences in the effectiveness of treatment regimens. Patients with MRSA infections may receive less‐effective therapy than patients with MSSA infection in 2 ways. First, patients might not be given vancomycin until their cultures are reported to show gram‐positive cocci in clusters. Our study showed a 1‐day difference in the time to receipt of effective therapy between patients with MRSA infection and patients with MSSA infection. We found some evidence that a delay in receipt of therapy is associated with death from S. aureus infection among patients with community‐acquired infections but not among patients with hospital‐acquired infections. This finding is at odds with a study by Lodise et al.,25 which found that a delay in receipt of therapy for hospital‐acquired S. aureus infection leads to an increased risk of infection‐related mortality. This finding may reflect differences in vancomycin prescribing practices, with the sickest patients with hospital‐acquired infections receiving vancomycin empirically at our hospital.
The second way in which therapy for patients with MRSA infection may be less effective is that vancomycin, the drug of choice for MRSA infection, may be an inferior agent compared with the drugs of choice for MSSA infections, the antistaphylococcal β‐lactams oxacillin and nafcillin. Gonzalez et al.23 reported that patients with pneumonia due to MSSA infection who received vancomycin had a significantly greater mortality risk than patients who received cloxacillin. Levine et al.26 reported that the median duration of bacteremia for patients with MRSA endocarditis treated with vancomycin was 9 days. Although their study did not include patients with MSSA endocarditis, other studies have shown that the median duration of bacteremia for patients with MSSA infection is 2‐4 days when being treated with oxacillin.27‐29 We also saw an increase in the duration of bacteremia in patients with MRSA infection, and a longer duration of bacteremia was associated with a higher infection‐related mortality risk. If this increase in duration is a result of the use of vancomycin, then this may, in part, explain the difference in the mortality risk.
Our study was methodologically strong. We intended to use the Charlson comorbidity index as a measure of the increased likelihood of mortality within 1 year. Although this index was recently found to be a good predictor of related and overall mortality in a similar population,7 we found that age alone was an adequate proxy variable to control for the effect of severity of underlying illnesses, implying that age is a good measure for controlling the number of underlying comorbid conditions. This finding has been observed in other populations.30,31 We also looked at infection‐related mortality as the outcome of interest rather than in‐hospital or all‐cause mortality. The use of a single Veterans Affairs healthcare system is a weakness and limits the generalizability of our findings because the population is largely male. However, focusing on veterans who receive health care through the VAMHCS allowed us to include all patients with S. aureus infection in the study period, limiting selection bias and loss to follow‐up.
In summary, our study results suggest that patients with MRSA infections other than pneumonia have an increased mortality risk, compared with patients with similar MSSA infections. This difference in mortality risk may be the result of treatment factors, such as the use of vancomycin. Future studies should focus on whether the use of newer antimicrobial agents, for example, linezolid and daptomycin, could improve outcomes among patients with MRSA infections other than pneumonia.
References
- 1. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) system report, data summary from January 1992–April 2000, issued June 2000. Am J Infect Control 2000; 28:429‐448.
- 2. Lewis E, Saravolatz LD. Comparison of methicillin‐resistant and methicillin‐sensitive Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Am J Infect Control 1985; 13:109‐114.
- 3. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System report, data summary from January 1990–May 1999, issued June 1999. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27:520‐532.
- 4. Selvey LA, Whitby M, Johnson B. Nosocomial methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: is it any worse than nosocomial methicillin‐sensitive Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000; 21:645‐648.
- 5. Lodise TP, McKinnon PS. Clinical and economic impact of methicillin resistance in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 52:113‐122.
- 6. Cosgrove SE, Sakoulas G, Perencevich EN, et al. Comparison of mortality associated with methicillin‐resistant and methicillin‐susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a meta‐analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 36:53‐59.
- 7. Hurley JC. Comparison of mortality associated with methicillin‐susceptible and methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: an ecological analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37:866‐868; author reply 868‐869.
- 8. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40:373‐383.
- 9. Lesens O, Methlin C, Hansmann Y, et al. Role of comorbidity in mortality related to Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a prospective study using the Charlson weighted index of comorbidity. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003; 24:890‐896.
- 10. Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, et al; The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee, American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. Chest 1992; 101:1644‐1655.
- 11. Garner JS, Jarvis WR, Emori TG, et al. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections, 1988. Am J Infect Control 1988; 16:128‐140.
- 12. Durack DT, Lukes AS, Bright DK. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: utilization of specific echocardiographic findings: Duke Endocarditis Service. Am J Med 1994; 96:200‐209.
- 13. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research, Volume I: The Analysis of Case‐Control Studies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc.; 1993. IARC Scientific Publication 32.
- 14. Concato J, Feinstein AR, Holford TR. The risk of determining risk with multivariable models. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118:201‐210.
- 15. Fowler VG Jr, Olsen MK, Corey GR, et al. Clinical identifiers of complicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163:2066‐2072.
- 16. Kim SH, Park WB, Lee KD, et al. Outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in patients with eradicable foci versus noneradicable foci. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37:794‐799.
- 17. Romero‐Vivas J, Rubio M, Fernandez C, et al. Mortality associated with nosocomial bacteremia due to methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 21:1417‐1423.
- 18. McClelland RS, Fowler VG Jr, Sanders LL, et al. Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia among elderly vs younger adult patients: comparison of clinical features and mortality. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159:1244‐1247.
- 19. Blot SI, Vandewoude KH, Hoste EA, et al. Outcome and attributable mortality in critically Ill patients with bacteremia involving methicillin‐susceptible and methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162:2229‐2235.
- 20. Conterno LO, Wey SB, Castelo A. Risk factors for mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998; 19:32‐37.
- 21. Gastmeier P, Sohr D, Geffers C, et al. Mortality risk factors with nosocomial Staphylococcus aureus infections in intensive care units: results from the German Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System (KISS). Infection 2005; 33:50‐55.
- 22. Zahar JR, Clec’h C, Tafflet M, Garrouste‐Orgeas M. Is methicillin resistance associated with a worse prognosis in Staphylococcus aureus ventilator‐associated pneumonia? Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:1224‐1231.
- 23. Gonzalez C, Rubio M, Romero‐Vivas J, et al. Bacteremic pneumonia due to Staphylococcus aureus: a comparison of disease caused by methicillin‐resistant and methicillin‐susceptible organisms. Clin Infect Dis 1999; 29:1171‐1177.
- 24. Combes A, Luyt CE, Fagon JY, et al. Impact of methicillin resistance on outcome of Staphylococcus aureus ventilator‐associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004; 170:786‐792.
- 25. Lodise TP, McKinnon PS, Swiderski L, et al. Outcomes analysis of delayed antibiotic treatment for hospital‐acquired Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 36:1418‐1423.
- 26. Levine DP, Fromm BS, Reddy BR. Slow response to vancomycin or vancomycin plus rifampin in methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Ann Intern Med 1991; 115:674‐680.
- 27. Korzeniowski O, Sande MA. Combination antimicrobial therapy for Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis in patients addicted to parenteral drugs and in nonaddicts: a prospective study. Ann Intern Med 1982; 97:496‐503.
- 28. Chambers HF, Korzeniowski OM, Sande MA. Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: clinical manifestations in addicts and nonaddicts. Medicine (Baltimore) 1983; 62:170‐177.
- 29. Cosgrove SE, Qi Y, Kaye KS, et al. The impact of methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia on patient outcomes: mortality, length of stay, and hospital charges. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005; 26:166‐174.
- 30. Schneeweiss S, Maclure M. Use of comorbidity scores for control of confounding in studies using administrative databases. Int J Epidemiol 2000; 29:891‐898.
- 31. Laupland KB, Church DL, Mucenski M, et al. Population‐based study of the epidemiology of and the risk factors for invasive Staphylococcus aureus infections. J Infect Dis 2003; 187:1452‐1459.


