Han Xiaonian, Huang Jing, Jia Xiaotao, Peng Lirong, Yan Kangkang, Zan Xin, Ma Li
Departments of Clinical Pharmacy.
Neurology.
Neurologist. 2018 Mar;23(2):35-42. doi: 10.1097/NRL.0000000000000152.
To determine if preventive antibiotics is effective in poststroke infection in patients with acute stroke in comparison with no prophylaxis.
MEDLINE (1950 to January 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2017) and EMBASE (1974 to January 2017) databases were used to search for randomized controlled trials with intervening measures related to the preventive antibiotics in patients with acute stroke. Besides, the reference lists of the retrieved publications were manually searched to explore other relevant studies.
We included 6 randomized controlled trials involving 4110 stroke patients. The study population, study design, intervening measures, and definition of infection were different. Preventive antibiotics significantly reduced the incidence of algorithm-defined infection in patients with acute stroke from 11.14% (220/1975) to 7.43% (149/2006); odds ratio (OR)=0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.20-0.87; P=0.02. There was no difference in mortality between 2 groups, the mortality in preventive antibiotics group was 17.03% (347/2037) and control group was 16.10% (328/2037); OR=1.07; 95% CI, 0.90-1.27; P=0.44. And preventive antibiotics did not improve the proportion of good outcome, the proportion of good outcome in preventive antibiotics group was 45.47% (909/1999) and control group was 45.76% (913/1995); OR=0.89; 95% CI, 0.62-1.28; P=0.53. None of the studies reported severe adverse relevant to the study antibiotics.
Preventive antibiotics significantly reduced the incidence of algorithm-defined infection in patients with acute stroke, but did not decrease the mortality or improve the proportion of good outcome. Future research should aim to identify the group of stroke patients who will benefit most from antibiotic prophylaxis.
比较预防性使用抗生素与不进行预防措施对急性卒中患者卒中后感染的效果。
使用MEDLINE(1950年至2017年1月)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL,Cochrane图书馆,2017年第1期)和EMBASE(1974年至2017年1月)数据库检索关于急性卒中患者预防性使用抗生素相关干预措施的随机对照试验。此外,人工检索所获出版物的参考文献列表以探索其他相关研究。
我们纳入了6项涉及4110例卒中患者的随机对照试验。研究人群、研究设计、干预措施及感染定义各不相同。预防性使用抗生素显著降低了急性卒中患者中算法定义感染的发生率,从11.14%(220/1975)降至7.43%(149/2006);比值比(OR)=0.41;95%置信区间(CI)为0.20 - 0.87;P = 0.02。两组间死亡率无差异,预防性使用抗生素组的死亡率为17.03%(347/2037),对照组为16.10%(328/2037);OR = 1.07;95% CI为0.90 - 1.27;P = 0.44。且预防性使用抗生素并未提高良好预后的比例,预防性使用抗生素组良好预后的比例为45.47%(909/1999),对照组为45.76%(913/1995);OR = 0.89;95% CI为0.62 - 1.28;P = 0.53。没有研究报告与研究用抗生素相关的严重不良事件。
预防性使用抗生素显著降低了急性卒中患者算法定义感染的发生率,但未降低死亡率或提高良好预后的比例。未来研究应致力于确定最能从抗生素预防中获益的卒中患者群体。