Skalsky Keren, Yahav Dafna, Bishara Jihad, Pitlik Silvio, Leibovici Leonard, Paul Mical
Internal Medicine E, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva 49100, Israel.
BMJ. 2008 Mar 29;336(7646):701-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39497.500903.25. Epub 2008 Mar 5.
To determine and quantify differences in efficacy between treatment regimens for brucellosis.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials assessing different antibiotic regimens and durations of treatment for human brucellosis.
PubMed, CENTRAL, Lilacs, conference proceedings, and bibliographies with no restrictions on language, study year, or publication status. Review methods Search, application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, data extraction, and assessment of methodological quality independently performed in duplicate. Primary outcomes were relapse and overall failure resulting from primary failure or relapse. Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated and pooled with a fixed effect model.
30 trials and 77 treatment arms were included. Overall failure was significantly higher with doxycycline-rifampicin compared to doxycycline-streptomycin, mainly due to a higher rate of relapse (relative risk 2.80, 95% confidence interval 1.81 to 4.36; 13 trials, without heterogeneity). Results were consistent among patients with bacteraemia and complicated brucellosis. Doxycycline-streptomycin resulted in a significantly higher rate of failure than doxycycline-rifampicin-aminoglycoside (triple drug regimen) (2.50, 1.26 to 5.00; two trials). Gentamicin was not inferior to streptomycin (1.45, 0.52 to 4.00 for failure; two trials). Quinolones combined with rifampicin were significantly less effective than doxycycline combined with rifampicin or streptomycin (1.83, 1.11 to 3.02, for failure; five trials). Monotherapy was associated with a higher risk of failure than combined treatment when administered for a similar duration (2.56, 1.55 to 4.23; five trials). Treatment for six weeks or more offered an advantage over shorter treatment durations.
There are significant differences in effectiveness between currently recommended treatment regimens for brucellosis. The preferred treatment should be with dual or triple regimens including an aminoglycoside.
确定并量化布鲁氏菌病治疗方案之间疗效的差异。
对评估人类布鲁氏菌病不同抗生素方案及治疗疗程的随机对照试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
PubMed、CENTRAL、Lilacs、会议论文集以及参考文献,对语言、研究年份或出版状态无限制。综述方法 检索、应用纳入和排除标准、数据提取以及方法学质量评估均独立进行两次。主要结局为初次治疗失败或复发导致的复发和总体治疗失败。计算相对风险及95%置信区间,并采用固定效应模型进行汇总。
纳入30项试验和77个治疗组。与多西环素-链霉素相比,多西环素-利福平治疗的总体失败率显著更高,主要原因是复发率更高(相对风险2.80,95%置信区间1.81至4.36;13项试验,无异质性)。菌血症患者和复杂性布鲁氏菌病患者的结果一致。多西环素-链霉素治疗失败率显著高于多西环素-利福平-氨基糖苷类(三联药物方案)(2.50,1.26至5.00;两项试验)。庆大霉素不劣于链霉素(治疗失败相对风险1.45,0.52至4.00;两项试验)。喹诺酮类与利福平联合使用的疗效显著低于多西环素与利福平或链霉素联合使用(治疗失败相对风险1.83,1.11至3.02;五项试验)。在相似疗程下,单药治疗与联合治疗相比失败风险更高(2.56,1.55至4.23;五项试验)。治疗六周或更长时间比更短疗程具有优势。
目前推荐的布鲁氏菌病治疗方案在有效性方面存在显著差异。首选治疗应为包含氨基糖苷类的双联或三联方案。