Suppr超能文献

住院成人社区获得性肺炎非典型病原体的经验性抗生素覆盖。

Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults.

作者信息

Eliakim-Raz Noa, Robenshtok Eyal, Shefet Daphna, Gafter-Gvili Anat, Vidal Liat, Paul Mical, Leibovici Leonard

机构信息

Department of Medicine E, Beilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12;2012(9):CD004418. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is caused by various pathogens, traditionally divided into 'typical' and 'atypical'. Initial antibiotic treatment of CAP is usually empirical, customarily covering both typical and atypical pathogens. To date, no sufficient evidence exists to support this broad coverage, while limiting coverage is bound to reduce toxicity, resistance and expense.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to estimate the mortality and proportion with treatment failure using regimens containing atypical antibiotic coverage compared to those that had typical coverage only. Secondary objectives included the assessment of adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 3, 2012 which includes the Acute Respiratory Infection Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (January 1966 to April week 1, 2012) and EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult patients hospitalized due to CAP, comparing antibiotic regimens with atypical coverage (quinolones, macrolides, tetracyclines, chloramphenicol, streptogramins or ketolides) to a regimen without atypical antibiotic coverage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from included trials. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using a Chi(2) test.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 trials, encompassing 5939 randomized patients. The atypical antibiotic was administered as monotherapy in all but three studies. Only one study assessed a beta-lactam combined with a macrolide compared to the same beta-lactam. There was no difference in mortality between the atypical arm and the non-atypical arm (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.55), RR < 1 favors the atypical arm. The atypical arm showed an insignificant trend toward clinical success and a significant advantage to bacteriological eradication, which disappeared when evaluating methodologically high quality studies alone. Clinical success for the atypical arm was significantly higher for Legionella pneumophilae (L. pneumophilae) and non-significantly lower for pneumococcal pneumonia. There was no significant difference between the groups in the frequency of (total) adverse events, or those requiring discontinuation of treatment. However, gastrointestinal events were less common in the atypical arm (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.92). Although the trials assessed different antibiotics, no significant heterogeneity was detected in the analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No benefit of survival or clinical efficacy was shown with empirical atypical coverage in hospitalized patients with CAP. This conclusion relates mostly to the comparison of quinolone monotherapy to beta-lactams. Further trials, comparing beta-lactam monotherapy to the same combined with a macrolide, should be performed.

摘要

背景

社区获得性肺炎(CAP)由多种病原体引起,传统上分为“典型”和“非典型”两类。CAP的初始抗生素治疗通常是经验性的,习惯上覆盖典型和非典型病原体。迄今为止,尚无充分证据支持这种广泛覆盖,而限制覆盖范围必然会降低毒性、耐药性和费用。

目的

主要目的是评估与仅采用典型覆盖方案相比,采用包含非典型抗生素覆盖方案的死亡率和治疗失败比例。次要目的包括评估不良事件。

检索方法

我们检索了《Cochrane系统评价数据库》2012年第3期,其中包括急性呼吸道感染组的专业注册库、MEDLINE(1966年1月至2012年4月第1周)和EMBASE(1980年1月至2012年4月)。

选择标准

因CAP住院的成年患者的随机对照试验(RCT),比较含非典型覆盖的抗生素方案(喹诺酮类、大环内酯类、四环素类、氯霉素、链阳菌素或酮内酯类)与不含非典型抗生素覆盖的方案。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者独立评估偏倚风险并从纳入试验中提取数据。我们估计了风险比(RRs)及95%置信区间(CIs)。我们使用卡方检验评估异质性。

主要结果

我们纳入了28项试验,涉及5939例随机分组患者。除三项研究外,所有研究中均将非典型抗生素作为单一疗法使用。仅一项研究评估了β-内酰胺类与大环内酯类联合使用与相同β-内酰胺类的比较。非典型组与非非典型组之间在死亡率上无差异(RR 1.14;95% CI 0.84至1.55),RR<1有利于非典型组。非典型组在临床成功方面显示出不显著的趋势,在细菌清除方面有显著优势,而单独评估方法学质量高的研究时该优势消失。对于嗜肺军团菌(L. pneumophilae),非典型组的临床成功率显著更高,对于肺炎球菌肺炎则非显著更低。两组在(总)不良事件频率或需要停药的不良事件频率方面无显著差异。然而,非典型组的胃肠道事件较少见(RR 0.70;95% CI 0.53至0.92)。尽管试验评估了不同抗生素,但分析中未检测到显著异质性。

作者结论

在住院的CAP患者中,经验性非典型覆盖未显示出生存或临床疗效方面的益处。该结论主要涉及喹诺酮类单一疗法与β-内酰胺类的比较。应开展进一步试验,比较β-内酰胺类单一疗法与β-内酰胺类联合大环内酯类的疗效。

相似文献

1
Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12;2012(9):CD004418. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub4.
2
Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23(1):CD004418. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub3.
3
Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Apr 18(2):CD004418. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub2.
5
Prophylactic antibiotics for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jan 15;1(1):CD013198. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013198.pub2.
6
Systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 6;2(2):CD011123. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011123.pub2.
7
Antibiotics for ventilator-associated pneumonia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 20;10(10):CD004267. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004267.pub4.
8
Sertindole for schizophrenia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jul 20;2005(3):CD001715. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001715.pub2.
9
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.
10
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
The role of empiric atypical antibiotic coverage in non-severe community-acquired pneumonia.
Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol. 2024 Dec 11;4(1):e214. doi: 10.1017/ash.2024.453. eCollection 2024.
4
Antibiotic Treatment of Pulmonary Infections: An Umbrella Review and Evidence Map.
Front Pharmacol. 2021 Oct 19;12:680178. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.680178. eCollection 2021.
6
A Pathway for Community-Acquired Pneumonia With Rapid Conversion to Oral Therapy Improves Health Care Value.
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020 Oct 19;7(11):ofaa497. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofaa497. eCollection 2020 Nov.
7
Antibiotic Choice and Clinical Outcomes in Ambulatory Children with Community-Acquired Pneumonia.
J Pediatr. 2021 Feb;229:207-215.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.10.005. Epub 2020 Oct 10.
8

本文引用的文献

1
Guidelines for the management of adult lower respiratory tract infections--summary.
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011 Nov;17 Suppl 6:1-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03602.x.
2
BTS guidelines for the management of community acquired pneumonia in adults: update 2009.
Thorax. 2009 Oct;64 Suppl 3:iii1-55. doi: 10.1136/thx.2009.121434.
3
Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23(1):CD004418. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub3.
4
Moxifloxacin vs ampicillin/sulbactam in aspiration pneumonia and primary lung abscess.
Infection. 2008 Feb;36(1):23-30. doi: 10.1007/s15010-007-7043-6. Epub 2008 Jan 29.
6
The need for macrolides in hospitalised community-acquired pneumonia: propensity analysis.
Eur Respir J. 2007 Sep;30(3):525-31. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00031007. Epub 2007 May 30.
8
Ketek--the FDA perspective.
N Engl J Med. 2007 Apr 19;356(16):1675-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc076135.
9
The FDA and the case of Ketek.
N Engl J Med. 2007 Apr 19;356(16):1601-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp078032.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验