Rojas M X, Granados C
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Universitario de San Ignacio, Cr. 7 #40-62, 2nd floor, Bogota, DC, Colombia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19;2006(2):CD004979. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004979.pub2.
Acute respiratory infection (ARI) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in children under five years of age in developing countries. When hospitalisation is required, the usual practice includes administering parenteral antibiotics if a bacterial infection is suspected. This has disadvantages as it causes pain and discomfort to the children, which may lead to treatment refusal or reduced compliance. It is also associated with needle-related complications. In some settings this equipment is in short supply or unavailable necessitating transfer of the child, which increases risks and healthcare costs.
To determine the equivalence in effectiveness and safety of oral antibiotic compared to parenteral antibiotic therapies in the treatment of severe pneumonia in children between three months and five years of age.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005); MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2005); EMBASE (January 1990 to July 2005) and LILACS (February 2005).
The review included published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any oral antibiotic therapy with any parenteral antibiotic therapy for the treatment of severe pneumonia in children from three months to five years of age.
The search yielded more than 1300 titles. Only three studies met all criteria for eligibility. One of the identified trials is yet to publish its results. We did not perform a meta-analysis because of clinical heterogeneity of therapies compared in the included trials.
Campbell 1988 compared oral co-trimoxazole versus intramuscular procaine penicillin followed by oral ampicillin in 134 children. At the seventh day of follow up, treatment failure occurred in 6/66 (9.1%) in the oral co-trimoxazole group and 7/68 (10.2%) in the combined-treatment group. The risk difference was -0.01% (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.09). The APPIS Group 2004 evaluated 1702 patients comparing oral amoxicillin versus intravenous penicillin for two days followed by oral amoxicillin. After 48 hours, treatment failure occurred in 161/845 (19%) in the amoxicillin group and 167/857 (19%) in the parenteral penicillin group. The risk difference was -0.4% (95% CI -4.2 to 3.3). The authors reported similar recovery in both groups at 5 and 14 days.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Oral therapy appears to be an effective and safe alternative to parenteral antibiotics in hospitalised children with severe pneumonia who do not have any serious signs or symptoms.
急性呼吸道感染(ARI)是发展中国家五岁以下儿童发病和死亡的主要原因之一。如需住院治疗,通常的做法是在怀疑有细菌感染时给予肠道外抗生素治疗。这样做存在弊端,因为它会给儿童带来疼痛和不适,这可能导致治疗被拒绝或依从性降低。它还与针头相关的并发症有关。在某些情况下,这种设备供应短缺或无法获得,因此需要转送儿童,这增加了风险和医疗成本。
确定口服抗生素与肠道外抗生素疗法在治疗三个月至五岁儿童重症肺炎方面的有效性和安全性的等效性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2005年第2期);MEDLINE(1966年1月至2005年7月);EMBASE(1990年1月至2005年7月)和拉丁美洲及加勒比地区卫生科学数据库(LILACS)(2005年2月)。
本综述纳入了已发表或未发表的随机对照试验(RCT)和半随机对照试验,比较了任何口服抗生素疗法与任何肠道外抗生素疗法治疗三个月至五岁儿童重症肺炎的效果。
检索得到1300多个标题。只有三项研究符合所有入选标准。其中一项已识别的试验尚未发表其结果。由于纳入试验中比较的疗法存在临床异质性,我们未进行荟萃分析。
Campbell 1988年比较了134名儿童口服复方新诺明与肌肉注射普鲁卡因青霉素后继以口服氨苄西林的疗效。在随访的第七天,口服复方新诺明组6/66(9.1%)出现治疗失败,联合治疗组7/68(10.2%)出现治疗失败。风险差异为-0.01%(95%置信区间(CI)-0.11至0.09)。APPIS研究组2004年评估了1702例患者,比较了口服阿莫西林与静脉注射青霉素两天后继以口服阿莫西林的疗效。48小时后,阿莫西林组161/845(19%)出现治疗失败,肠道外青霉素组167/857(19%)出现治疗失败。风险差异为-0.4%(95%CI -4.2至3.3)。作者报告两组在第5天和第14天的恢复情况相似。
对于没有任何严重体征或症状的住院重症肺炎儿童,口服疗法似乎是肠道外抗生素的一种有效且安全的替代方法。