Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Athens, Greece.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2012 Apr;87(4):349-63. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2011.12.011.
To study the effectiveness and safety of vancomycin compared with that of other antibiotics for the treatment of gram-positive infections.
Major electronic databases were searched. Data from published randomized controlled trials (January 1, 1950, to September 15, 2011) were pooled using a meta-analytic method.
Fifty-three trials comparing vancomycin with linezolid, daptomycin, quinupristin-dalfopristin, tigecycline, ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, telavancin, teicoplanin, iclaprim, and dalbavancin were included in the meta-analysis. Individual antibiotics were as effective as vancomycin, except for linezolid, which was more effective than vancomycin for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.43). Comparators were as effective as vancomycin in the intent-to-treat population (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.18) but were more effective in the clinically evaluable population (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02-1.27) when all infections were pooled. When available data from all trials were pooled, no differences were noted when patients with febrile neutropenia (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82-1.39), pneumonia (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.87-1.37), bacteremia (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.76-1.45), and skin and soft tissue infections (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.39) were studied. Comparators were more effective in open-label (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.50) but not in double-blind trials (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90-1.20). Total adverse events attributed to studied antibiotics (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90-1.28) and patients withdrawn from trials (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.68-1.09) were similar in the compared groups. Mortality was not different between vancomycin and comparator antibiotics when all trials were included in the analysis (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.96-1.23). Comparators were associated with higher mortality in open-label (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.05-1.54) but not double-blind trials (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80-1.14).
On the basis mainly of data from open-label trials, vancomycin is a treatment choice that is as effective as other available antibiotics for patients with gram-positive infections. Study design seems to make a major contribution to the outcome.
研究万古霉素与其他抗生素治疗革兰阳性感染的疗效和安全性。
检索主要电子数据库。使用荟萃分析方法合并 1950 年 1 月 1 日至 2011 年 9 月 15 日发表的随机对照试验的数据。
共有 53 项比较万古霉素与利奈唑胺、达托霉素、奎奴普丁/达福普汀、替加环素、头孢洛林、头孢比普、替拉万星、替考拉宁、伊克拉普林和达巴万星的试验纳入荟萃分析。个别抗生素与万古霉素疗效相当,只有利奈唑胺治疗皮肤软组织感染的疗效优于万古霉素(比值比 [OR],1.61;95%置信区间 [CI],1.07-2.43)。意向治疗人群中比较药物与万古霉素疗效相当(OR,1.08;95%CI,0.98-1.18),但在所有感染合并分析时,在可评估人群中(OR,1.14;95%CI,1.02-1.27),比较药物疗效更好。当合并所有试验的可用数据时,在研究中性粒细胞减少伴发热(OR,1.07;95%CI,0.82-1.39)、肺炎(OR,1.10;95%CI,0.87-1.37)、菌血症(OR,1.05;95%CI,0.76-1.45)和皮肤软组织感染(OR,1.11;95%CI,0.89-1.39)的患者中,未观察到差异。在开放标签(OR,1.28;95%CI,1.08-1.50)而非双盲试验(OR,1.04;95%CI,0.90-1.20)中,比较药物疗效更好。研究抗生素引起的总不良事件(OR,1.07;95%CI,0.90-1.28)和因不良事件退出试验的患者(OR,0.86;95%CI,0.68-1.09)在比较组中相似。当所有试验均纳入分析时,万古霉素与比较抗生素的死亡率无差异(OR,1.09;95%CI,0.96-1.23)。在开放标签(OR,1.27;95%CI,1.05-1.54)而非双盲试验(OR,0.96;95%CI,0.80-1.14)中,比较药物与更高的死亡率相关。
主要基于开放标签试验数据,万古霉素是治疗革兰阳性感染的一种选择,与其他可用抗生素疗效相当。研究设计似乎对结果有重大影响。