• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗急性重症成年患者耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌血流感染的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析的结果。

Cefazolin vs. anti-staphylococcal penicillins for treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections in acutely ill adult patients: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, University of California Irvine Health, Orange, CA; Department of Pharmacy, USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

Department of Pharmacy Practice, Midwestern University, Chicago College of Pharmacy, Downers Grove, IL; Department of Pharmacy, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.

出版信息

Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 Mar;53(3):225-233. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.11.013. Epub 2018 Nov 23.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.11.013
PMID:30476572
Abstract

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of cefazolin vs. anti-staphylococcal penicillins (ASPs) for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bloodstream infections (BSI). Utilizing published regression models, included studies were stratified into subgroups of high and low pre-probability of mortality. Cefazolin was associated with significantly lower rates of treatment failure (odds ratio [OR]: 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-0.82; P<0.001; I = 14%) and crude, all-cause mortality (OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.59-0.81; P<0.001; I = 18%) compared with ASP therapy. Overall risk of treatment-related adverse drug reactions was numerically lower with cefazolin (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.15-1.00; P = 0.05). Subgroup sensitivity analyses of studies conducted in less severely ill patients were similar to the combined analysis. The role of cefazolin in the most severely ill patients with MSSA BSI should be prospectively evaluated.

摘要

一项系统的文献回顾和荟萃分析评估了头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素(ASP)治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)血流感染(BSI)的疗效和耐受性。利用已发表的回归模型,将纳入的研究分为高和低死亡率预测概率亚组。与 ASP 治疗相比,头孢唑林治疗的治疗失败率显著降低(比值比 [OR]:0.70;95%置信区间 [CI]:0.61-0.82;P<0.001;I ² = 14%),粗死亡率(OR:0.69;95% CI:0.59-0.81;P<0.001;I ² = 18%)也显著降低。头孢唑林治疗相关药物不良反应的总体风险略低(OR:0.39;95% CI:0.15-1.00;P = 0.05)。在病情较轻的患者中进行的研究的亚组敏感性分析与合并分析结果相似。应前瞻性评估头孢唑林在 MSSA BSI 中最严重感染患者中的作用。

相似文献

1
Cefazolin vs. anti-staphylococcal penicillins for treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections in acutely ill adult patients: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗急性重症成年患者耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌血流感染的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析的结果。
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 Mar;53(3):225-233. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.11.013. Epub 2018 Nov 23.
2
Implementation of a cefazolin-based stewardship pathway for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections paired with infectious diseases consultation.实施头孢唑林为基础的耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌血流感染管理路径,并联合感染病会诊。
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017 May;49(5):650-654. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.12.021. Epub 2017 Mar 6.
3
Comparative outcomes of cefazolin versus antistaphylococcal penicillins in methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis: a post hoc analysis of a prospective multicentre French cohort study.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌感染性心内膜炎的比较结果:一项法国前瞻性多中心队列研究的事后分析
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Jul;27(7):1015-1021. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.08.044. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
4
β-Lactam Therapy for Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: A Comparative Review of Cefazolin versus Antistaphylococcal Penicillins.β-内酰胺类药物治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症:头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素的比较综述
Pharmacotherapy. 2017 Mar;37(3):346-360. doi: 10.1002/phar.1892. Epub 2017 Feb 7.
5
Cefazolin versus anti-staphylococcal penicillins for the treatment of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症患者的比较。
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019 Jul;25(7):818-827. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.03.010. Epub 2019 Mar 27.
6
Efficacy and safety of cefazolin versus antistaphylococcal penicillins for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症的疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Oct 11;18(1):508. doi: 10.1186/s12879-018-3418-9.
7
Cefazolin versus Nafcillin for Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection in a California Tertiary Medical Center.在加利福尼亚一家三级医疗中心,头孢唑林与萘夫西林治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌血流感染的比较
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016 Jul 22;60(8):4684-9. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00243-16. Print 2016 Aug.
8
Optimal treatment of MSSA bacteraemias: a meta-analysis of cefazolin versus antistaphylococcal penicillins.金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症的最佳治疗方法:头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素的荟萃分析。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018 Oct 1;73(10):2643-2651. doi: 10.1093/jac/dky259.
9
Meta-analysis of trials comparing cefazolin to antistaphylococcal penicillins in the treatment of methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症的试验的荟萃分析。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Jun;84(6):1258-1266. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13554. Epub 2018 Apr 10.
10
Cefazolin versus anti-staphylococcal penicillins for treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: a narrative review.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症的比较:叙述性综述。
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018 Feb;24(2):125-132. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.07.003. Epub 2017 Jul 8.

引用本文的文献

1
β-Lactam Inoculum Effect in Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Infective Endocarditis.β-内酰胺接种物效应在甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌感染性心内膜炎中的作用
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Dec 2;7(12):e2451353. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.51353.
2
Emerging Treatment Options for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections and Bloodstream Infections Caused by : A Comprehensive Review of the Evidence.新兴的针对由[病原体]引起的急性细菌性皮肤及皮肤结构感染和血流感染的治疗选择:证据的全面综述
Infect Drug Resist. 2022 Apr 22;15:2137-2157. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S318322. eCollection 2022.
3
The Cost-effectiveness of Cefazolin Compared With Antistaphylococcal Penicillins for the Treatment of Methicillin-Sensitive Bacteremia.
头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗甲氧西林敏感菌血症的成本效益比较
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2021 Oct 4;8(11):ofab476. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofab476. eCollection 2021 Nov.
4
β-Lactams against the Fortress of the Gram-Positive Bacterium.β-内酰胺类药物对抗革兰阳性菌的堡垒。
Chem Rev. 2021 Mar 24;121(6):3412-3463. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01010. Epub 2020 Dec 29.
5
Disproportionality Analysis of Safety with Nafcillin and Oxacillin with the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).利用 FDA 不良事件报告系统(FAERS)对萘夫西林和苯唑西林的安全性进行比例失衡分析。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020 Feb 21;64(3). doi: 10.1128/AAC.01818-19.
6
Cefazolin Versus Anti-Staphylococcal Penicillins for the Treatment of Patients with Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Infection: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.头孢唑林与抗葡萄球菌青霉素治疗甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌感染患者的疗效比较:一项采用序贯试验分析的荟萃分析
Infect Dis Ther. 2019 Dec;8(4):671-686. doi: 10.1007/s40121-019-00259-4. Epub 2019 Aug 8.