Gavranich J B, Chang A B
Ipswich Hospital, PO Box 73, Ipswich, Queensland, Australia, 4305.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jul 20(3):CD004875. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004875.pub2.
Mycoplasma pneumoniae (M. pneumoniae) is widely recognised as an important cause of community-acquired lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in children. Pulmonary manifestations are typically tracheobronchitis or pneumonia but M. pneumoniae is also implicated in wheezing episodes in both asthmatic and non-asthmatic individuals. Although antibiotics are used to treat LRTI, a review of several major textbooks offers conflicting advice for the use of antibiotics in the management of M. pneumoniae LRTI in children.
To determine whether antibiotics are effective in the treatment of childhood LRTI secondary to M. pneumoniae infections acquired in the community.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2005), which contains the ARI Group's specialised register of trials; MEDLINE (1966 to February 2005); and EMBASE (1980 to December 2004).
Randomised controlled trials comparing antibiotics commonly used for treating M. pneumoniae (i.e. macrolide, tetracycline or quinolone classes) versus placebo, or antibiotics from any other class in the treatment of children under 18 years of age with community acquired LRTI secondary to M. pneumoniae.
The authors independently selected trials for inclusion and assessed methodological quality. Relevant data were extracted and analysed separately and any disagreements were resolved by consensus.
A total of 1352 children were enrolled from six studies. The number of children from one study was unavailable. Data interpretation was significantly limited by the inability to extract data that specifically referred to children with M. pneumoniae. Clinical response did not differ between the children randomised to a macrolide antibiotic and the children randomised to a non-macrolide antibiotic. There were no studies comparing relevant antibiotics with placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of antibiotics for LRTI secondary to M. pneumoniae in children. The use of antibiotics for M. pneumoniae LRTI has to be individualised and balanced with possible adverse events associated with antibiotic use. There is a need for high quality, double-blinded randomised controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of antibiotics for LRTI secondary to M. pneumoniae in children.
肺炎支原体被广泛认为是儿童社区获得性下呼吸道感染(LRTI)的重要病因。肺部表现通常为气管支气管炎或肺炎,但肺炎支原体也与哮喘和非哮喘个体的喘息发作有关。尽管抗生素用于治疗LRTI,但对几本主要教科书的回顾对于儿童肺炎支原体LRTI治疗中抗生素的使用给出了相互矛盾的建议。
确定抗生素在治疗社区获得性肺炎支原体感染继发的儿童LRTI中是否有效。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(2005年第1期《Cochrane图书馆》),其中包含ARI小组的专门试验注册库;MEDLINE(1966年至2005年2月);以及EMBASE(1980年至2004年12月)。
比较常用于治疗肺炎支原体的抗生素(即大环内酯类、四环素类或喹诺酮类)与安慰剂,或任何其他类别的抗生素在治疗18岁以下社区获得性肺炎支原体继发LRTI儿童中的随机对照试验。
作者独立选择纳入试验并评估方法学质量。提取相关数据并分别进行分析,任何分歧通过协商解决。
六项研究共纳入1352名儿童。一项研究中的儿童数量不详。由于无法提取专门针对肺炎支原体儿童的数据,数据解读受到显著限制。随机接受大环内酯类抗生素的儿童与随机接受非大环内酯类抗生素的儿童临床反应无差异。没有比较相关抗生素与安慰剂的研究。
本综述发现,没有足够证据就抗生素对儿童肺炎支原体继发LRTI的疗效得出任何结论。肺炎支原体LRTI抗生素的使用必须个体化,并与抗生素使用可能带来的不良事件相权衡。需要高质量的双盲随机对照试验来评估抗生素对儿童肺炎支原体继发LRTI的疗效和安全性。