Is ceftriaxone (Ceftriaxone) effective against Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: September 7, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Ceftriaxone Coverage for MSSA

Ceftriaxone is effective against Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections as confirmed by its FDA-approved indication, but it is not the preferred first-line agent for MSSA infections when other options are available. 1

Efficacy Against MSSA

Ceftriaxone is FDA-approved for treating various infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus, including:

  • Lower respiratory tract infections
  • Skin and skin structure infections
  • Bone and joint infections
  • Bacterial septicemia 1

However, there are important clinical considerations regarding its use for MSSA:

Pharmacodynamic Considerations

  • The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for MSSA is generally 2-4 times higher with ceftriaxone compared to antistaphylococcal penicillins or cefazolin 2
  • Higher doses (2g daily or twice daily) are needed to achieve adequate bacterial killing against MSSA 2

Preferred Treatment Options for MSSA

The preferred first-line agents for MSSA infections are:

  • Antistaphylococcal beta-lactams (oxacillin, nafcillin)
  • Cefazolin 3

These agents are recommended over ceftriaxone because:

  1. They have superior efficacy against MSSA
  2. They have more favorable pharmacodynamic properties for MSSA
  3. They demonstrate better clinical outcomes in comparative studies 4

Clinical Evidence

Recent research has produced mixed results regarding ceftriaxone for MSSA infections:

  • A 2023 multicenter retrospective cohort study found that definitive treatment with ceftriaxone was associated with higher risk of treatment failure within 90 days compared to cefazolin or antistaphylococcal penicillins (HR 2.66,95% CI 1.15-6.12) 4

  • A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 retrospective cohort studies found that ceftriaxone was not statistically different from standard of care in clinical cure rates, microbiological cure, mortality, or hospital readmission 5

  • A 2023 noninferiority retrospective cohort study found ceftriaxone to be noninferior to cefazolin for MSSA bloodstream infections in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy settings 6

Practical Applications

When to Consider Ceftriaxone for MSSA

  • Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy where once-daily dosing is advantageous
  • When first-line agents are contraindicated (e.g., true penicillin allergy)
  • Limited intravenous access where multiple daily infusions are impractical
  • Continuation therapy after initial stabilization with first-line agents

Dosing Recommendations

  • When used for MSSA infections, higher doses (2g daily) are recommended based on pharmacodynamic studies 2
  • Standard dosing may be inadequate for optimal bacterial killing of MSSA

Conclusion

While ceftriaxone does have activity against MSSA and is FDA-approved for treating S. aureus infections, it should not be considered a first-line agent for MSSA infections when antistaphylococcal penicillins or cefazolin are available options. The most recent evidence suggests potentially higher treatment failure rates with ceftriaxone compared to traditional first-line agents, particularly for serious infections like bloodstream infections 4.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.