Vedi Aditi, Cohn Richard
Sydney Children's Hospital, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
J Paediatr Child Health. 2013 Mar;49(3):170-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2011.02201.x. Epub 2011 Dec 2.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether, in low-risk febrile neutropenic paediatric populations, oral antibiotics are as effective as intravenous antibiotics in obtaining resolution of the febrile neutropenic episode. A comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL identified prospective, randomised controlled trials comparing oral antibiotics with intravenous antibiotics in the treatment of febrile neutropenic episodes in low-risk paediatric oncology patients. Outcomes assessed were mortality, rate of treatment failure, length of the febrile neutropenic episode and adverse events. The random effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean difference with standard deviation for continuous data. Seven trials were included in the overall analysis, which included 934 episodes of febrile neutropenia in 676 patients aged between 9 months and 20 years. The overall treatment failure rates were not significantly different between oral and intravenous antibiotics (RR: 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.32, P= 0.91). In carefully selected low-risk febrile neutropenic children, empiric treatment with oral antibiotics is a safe and effective alternative to intravenous antibiotics as they lower the cost of treatment as well as psychosocial burden on these children and their families.
本研究的目的是确定在低风险发热性中性粒细胞减少的儿科人群中,口服抗生素在使发热性中性粒细胞减少症得到缓解方面是否与静脉用抗生素一样有效。对MEDLINE、EMBASE和CENTRAL进行全面文献检索,确定了比较口服抗生素与静脉用抗生素治疗低风险儿科肿瘤患者发热性中性粒细胞减少症的前瞻性随机对照试验。评估的结局包括死亡率、治疗失败率、发热性中性粒细胞减少症发作的持续时间和不良事件。采用随机效应模型计算二分数据的风险比(RRs)和连续数据的均值差及标准差。总体分析纳入了7项试验,共676例年龄在9个月至20岁之间的患者发生934次发热性中性粒细胞减少症发作。口服抗生素和静脉用抗生素的总体治疗失败率无显著差异(RR:1.02,95%置信区间0.78 - 1.32,P = 0.91)。在精心挑选的低风险发热性中性粒细胞减少儿童中,口服抗生素经验性治疗是静脉用抗生素的一种安全有效的替代方法,因为它们降低了治疗成本以及这些儿童及其家庭的心理社会负担。