Prasad K, Kumar A, Gupta P K, Singhal T
All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Neurosciences Center, Room No. 704, AIIMS, New Delhi, India, 11002.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17;2007(4):CD001832. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001832.pub3.
Antibiotic therapy for suspected acute bacterial meningitis (ABM) needs to be started immediately, even before the results of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture and antibiotic sensitivity are available. Immediate commencement of effective treatment using the intravenous route may reduce death and disability. Although bacterial meningitis guidelines advise the use of third generation cephalosporins, these drugs are often not available in hospitals in low income countries.
The objective of this review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of third generation cephalosporins and conventional treatment with penicillin or ampicillin-chloramphenicol in patients with community-acquired ABM.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1) which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Trials Register, MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2007), and EMBASE (January 1974 to March 2007). We also searched the reference list of review articles and book chapters, and contacted experts for any unpublished trials.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ceftriaxone or cefotaxime with conventional antibiotics as empirical therapy for acute bacterial meningitis.
Two review authors independently applied the study selection criteria, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data.
Nineteen trials that involved 1496 patients were included in the analysis. There was no heterogeneity of results among the studies in any outcome except diarrhoea. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in the risk of death (risk difference (RD) 0%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3% to 2%), risk of deafness (RD -4%; 95% CI -9% to 1%), or risk of treatment failure (RD -1%; 95% CI -4% to 2%). However, there were significantly decreased risks of culture positivity of CSF after 10 to 48 hours (RD -6%; 95% CI -11% to 0%) and statistically significant increases in the risk of diarrhoea between the groups (RD 8%; 95% CI 3% to 13%) with the third generation cephalosporins. The risk of neutropaenia and skin rash were not significantly different between the two groups. However, all the studies were conducted in the 1980s except three, which were reported in 1993, 1996, and 2005.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review shows no clinically important difference between ceftriaxone or cefotaxime and conventional antibiotics. In situations where availability or affordability is an issue, third generation cephalosporins, ampicillin-chloramphenicol combination, or chloramphenicol alone may be used as alternatives. The antimicrobial resistance pattern against various antibiotics needs to be closely monitored in low to middle income countries as well as high income countries.
对于疑似急性细菌性脑膜炎(ABM)的患者,即便脑脊液(CSF)培养及抗生素敏感性结果尚未得出,也需立即开始抗生素治疗。通过静脉途径立即开始有效的治疗可能会降低死亡和残疾风险。尽管细菌性脑膜炎指南建议使用第三代头孢菌素,但在低收入国家的医院中这些药物往往难以获得。
本综述的目的是比较第三代头孢菌素与青霉素或氨苄西林 - 氯霉素常规治疗在社区获得性ABM患者中的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2007年第1期),其中包含Cochrane急性呼吸道感染组试验注册库、MEDLINE(1966年1月至2007年3月)和EMBASE(1974年1月至2007年3月)。我们还检索了综述文章和书籍章节的参考文献列表,并联系专家获取任何未发表的试验。
比较头孢曲松或头孢噻肟与常规抗生素作为急性细菌性脑膜炎经验性治疗的随机对照试验(RCTs)。
两位综述作者独立应用研究选择标准、评估方法学质量并提取数据。
纳入分析的有19项试验,涉及1496名患者。除腹泻外,各研究在任何结局方面均无结果异质性。两组在死亡风险(风险差(RD)0%;95%置信区间(CI)-3%至2%)、耳聋风险(RD -4%;95% CI -9%至1%)或治疗失败风险(RD -1%;95% CI -4%至2%)方面无统计学显著差异。然而,使用第三代头孢菌素后,10至48小时后脑脊液培养阳性风险显著降低(RD -6%;95% CI -11%至0%),且两组间腹泻风险有统计学显著增加(RD 8%;95% CI 3%至13%)。两组间中性粒细胞减少和皮疹风险无显著差异。然而,除了1993年、1996年和2005年报道的三项研究外,所有研究均在20世纪80年代进行。
本综述表明头孢曲松或头孢噻肟与常规抗生素之间无临床重要差异。在药物可及性或可负担性存在问题的情况下,第三代头孢菌素、氨苄西林 - 氯霉素联合用药或单独使用氯霉素可作为替代选择。在低收入、中等收入国家以及高收入国家,都需要密切监测针对各种抗生素的抗菌耐药模式。