Macrolides or fluoroquinolones as enteral antibiotic therapy for non-ICU legionellosis
- 21 Downloads
While legionellosis incidence has increased in Europe, up to 21% from 2012 to 2016 [ 1], the choice between fluoroquinolones or macrolides as first-line antibiotic therapy remains controversial. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 2014 [ 2] included 12 studies with some favoring fluoroquinolones and some macrolides, with a 0.5 mortality odds ratio for fluoroquinolones, but it was not significant. Length of stay (LOS) was shorter. In a recent study [ 3], which is the biggest series (446 legionellosis), no difference was found for mortality, LOS, and duration of fever. Herein we report the results of our cohort of patients presenting with legionellosis treated according to our internal guideline advising enteral macrolide since April 2008. Roxithromycin was selected among macrolide, for which there is no parenteral form (Table 1).
Comparison of patients according to antibiotic treatment for legionellosis
n = 55 (47%)
n = 39 (33%)
Other antibiotic therapies
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
- 1.European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Legionnaires’ disease—Annual Epidemiological Report for 2016. https://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/legionnaires-disease-annual-epidemiological-report-2016. Accessed 8 Aug 2018.
- 5.European Commission. Amending Decision 2002/253/EC laying down case definitions for reporting communicable diseasesto the Community network under Decision No 2119/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. OJ L 159, 18.6.2008, 2008. p. 46–90. Google Scholar
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019