Evidence Hub

Daptomycin and linezolid salvage therapy for persistent ampicillin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis bacteremia in a patient with possible anaphylaxis to β-lactam and glycopeptide antimicrobials: A case report

Phuong N, Collins J, Li LX, Messieh M, Drucker Iarovich M, Blankstein U, Komorowski AS

Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada, 2026

Abstract

Background: Enterococcus species are gram-positive organisms that are among the most prevalent causes of bacteremia with a urinary source. Combination therapy is considered for deep-seated enterococcal infections due to the occasionally poor bactericidal activity of cell wall-active agents, high failure rates, and synergistic activity. The use of daptomycin and linezolid as monotherapy or as combination therapy with β-lactams or aminoglycosides is well described in the literature; however, the efficacy of daptomycin and linezolid combination therapy is less clear.

Methods: Retrospective single-chart review and single-database narrative literature review.

Results: We describe a 60-year-old man with persistent ampicillin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis bacteremia secondary to a right ureteric stone. His management was complicated by a suspected anaphylactic reaction shortly after receiving vancomycin and ceftriaxone that progressed after receiving ampicillin and cefazolin, as well as delayed source control due to safety concerns withholding anticoagulation for concurrent high-burden bilateral pulmonary emboli, ultimately resulting in persistent bacteremia. His bacteremia cleared with combination therapy of daptomycin 10 mg/kg intravenously daily and linezolid 600 mg orally every 12 hours. A review of the literature of Ovid MEDLINE from 2000 to July 16, 2025, revealed limited reported use of combination daptomycin and linezolid for the microbiologic cure of enterococcal…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free