A 2016 meta-analysis compared clinical outcomes of patients treated with continuous versus intermittent infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics. Three randomized controlled trials with a total of 632 patients having severe sepsis were included for analysis. Rates of hospital mortality and clinical cure were improved in patients receiving continuous versus intermittent infusion (hospital mortality: 19.6% vs. 26.3%, relative risk [RR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 1, p= 0.045; clinical cure: 55.4% vs. 46.3%, RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.4, p= 0.021). Additionally, continuous infusion of beta-lactam therapy was significantly associated with reduced odds of hospital mortality censored at 30 days in a multivariate analysis (odds ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.94, p= 0.03). The authors concluded administration of beta-lactam antibiotics by continuous infusion in critically ill patients with severe sepsis is associated with decreased hospital mortality compared to intermittent dosing. Of note, cefazolin was not one of the beta-lactams studied in this analysis. [1]
A 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis assessed whether continuous infusion of β-lactam antibiotics improves clinical outcomes compared to intermittent infusion in adult patients with sepsis or septic shock. This comprehensive analysis synthesized data from eleven randomized controlled trials involving 9,166 patients. The review found that continuous infusion of β-lactams did not result in significant differences in overall mortality (RR 0.94; 95% CI: 0.88–1.01) or ICU mortality (RR 0.94; 95% CI: 0.88–1.01) when compared to intermittent infusion. However, continuous infusion was associated with lower hospital mortality (RR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85–0.99), higher survival at the end of the study (RR 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02–1.07), and a higher clinical cure rate (RR 1.42; 95% CI: 1.12–1.80). No significant differences were observed in the length of ICU or hospital stay or in the incidence of adverse events. The findings suggest that continuous infusion could potentially reduce hospital mortality and enhance the clinical cure rate in critically ill patients, although its effects on overall mortality and adverse events require further investigation. However, findings are not specific to staphylococcus aureus infection. [2]