Daptomycin as an Option for Lock Therapy: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Aim: To review preclinical and clinical data relevant to daptomycin lock therapy in catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). Methods: Systematic review in PubMed, Scopus and clinical trial registries. Results: Preclinical data demonstrate daptomycin lock solution stability and compatibility with heparin, good biofilm penetration, bactericidal activity against biofilm-embedded bacteria, and high efficacy in vitro and in animal catheter infection models. Clinical data remain limited (two case reports and five case series totaling n = 65 CRBSI episodes), albeit promising (successful catheter salvage in about 80% of cases). Conclusion: Despite theoretical advantages of daptomycin, clinical data remain scarce. Comparative studies versus alternative lock solutions are needed, as well as studies to define optimal daptomycin lock regimen (including optimal concentration, dwell time and lock duration).

Plain language summary

Some patients, such as those needing cancer treatments, kidney dialysis or to be fed through a vein, need long-term access to central veins by a tube called a catheter. These central venous catheters can often become infected and will need to be removed and replaced. Sometimes, the catheter can be saved by ‘locking’ the tube with a solution to kill any germs. In this review, we discuss the potential to use an antibiotic called daptomycin as the solution in lock therapy. Available data are reviewed and advantages over alternative antimicrobial lock solutions are discussed. Finally, directions for future research are proposed.

Keywords::

• biofilm
• catheter-related bloodstream infection
• daptomycin
• lock
• systematic review

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.tandfonline.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/fmb-2023-0059

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.