Previous episodes for the basics of Staphylococcus aureus and SABATO & SNAP trials:

Discussion points

Difficulty interpreting current clinical trials in SAB
1. inter-trial differences in recruited patients,
2. often low eligibility of real-world patients,
3. evidence mainly relates to MRSA since most trials are USA,
4. differences in source and mortality of trial vs. real world patients.
Emerging concept of “low risk” SAB
1. various definitions: SABATO, SNAP (EOS at day 7), and Hendrik’s et al (PMID: 38576380).
2. Although around 1 in 5 real world patients meet a definition, there is limited overlap and agreement between the definitions.
3. They identify different patient groups with differences in outcome.
4. So need for a consensus to use in real life.
Heterogeneity in SAB can be exploited.
1. Discuss the sub-phenotypes study, in particular differences in rifampicin effect (higher mortality in our low risk category; better microbiologic outcomes in community-acquired metastatic SAB).
2. Stratified trial recruitment might help with issue 1.

Difficulty interpreting current clinical trials in SAB