Centre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Joint first authorship.
J Glob Health. 2017 Jun;7(1):010417. doi: 10.7189/jogh.07.010417.
Recognition of a broad spectrum of disease and development of infection (CDI) and recurrent CDI (rCDI) in populations previously considered to be at low risk has renewed attention on differences in the risk profile of patients. In the absence of primary prevention for CDI and limited treatment options, it is important to achieve a deep understanding of the multiple factors that influence the risk of developing CDI and rCDI.
We conducted a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on risk factors for CDI and rCDI published between 1990 and October 2016.
22 systematic reviews assessing risk factors for CDI (n = 19) and rCDI (n = 6) were included. Meta-analyses were conducted in 17 of the systematic reviews. Over 40 risk factors have been associated with CDI and rCDI and can be classified into three categories: pharmacological risk factors, host-related risk factors, and clinical characteristics or interventions. Most systematic reviews and meta-analyses have focused on antibiotic use (n = 8 for CDI, 3 for rCDI), proton pump inhibitors (n = 8 for CDI, 4 for rCDI), and histamine 2 receptor antagonists (n = 4 for CDI) and chronic kidney disease (n = 4 for rCDI). However, other risk factors have been assessed. We discuss the state of the evidence, methods, and challenges for data synthesis.
Several studies, synthesized in different systematic review, provide valuable insights into the role of different risk factors for CDI. Meta-analytic evidence of association has been reported for factors such as antibiotics, gastric acid suppressants, non-selective NSAID, and some co-morbidities. However, despite statistical significance, issues of high heterogeneity, bias and confounding remain to be addressed effectively to improve overall risk estimates. Large, prospective primary studies on risk factors for CDI with standardised case definitions and stratified analyses are required to develop more accurate and robust estimates of risk effects that can inform targeted-CDI clinical management procedures, prevention, and research.
在以往被认为风险较低的人群中,广泛认识到疾病和感染(CDI)以及复发性 CDI(rCDI)的发展,这重新引起了人们对患者风险特征差异的关注。由于缺乏针对 CDI 的一级预防措施和有限的治疗选择,因此深入了解影响 CDI 和 rCDI 风险的多种因素非常重要。
我们对 1990 年至 2016 年 10 月期间发表的关于 CDI 和 rCDI 危险因素的系统评价和荟萃分析进行了综述。
共纳入 22 项评估 CDI(n=19)和 rCDI(n=6)危险因素的系统评价。17 项系统评价进行了荟萃分析。已有超过 40 个危险因素与 CDI 和 rCDI 相关,并可分为三类:药理学危险因素、宿主相关危险因素和临床特征或干预措施。大多数系统评价和荟萃分析都集中在抗生素使用(n=8 项 CDI,3 项 rCDI)、质子泵抑制剂(n=8 项 CDI,4 项 rCDI)和组胺 2 受体拮抗剂(n=4 项 CDI)和慢性肾脏病(n=4 项 rCDI)上。但是,已经评估了其他危险因素。我们讨论了证据状况、方法和数据综合的挑战。
一些研究在不同的系统评价中进行了综合,为 CDI 不同危险因素的作用提供了有价值的见解。已经报道了抗生素、胃酸抑制剂、非选择性 NSAID 和一些合并症等因素的关联的荟萃分析证据。但是,尽管具有统计学意义,但仍存在高度异质性、偏倚和混杂等问题,需要有效地解决这些问题,以提高总体风险估计的准确性和稳健性。需要开展具有标准病例定义和分层分析的针对 CDI 危险因素的大型前瞻性初级研究,以便制定更准确、更稳健的风险效应估计值,为有针对性的 CDI 临床管理程序、预防和研究提供信息。