Tan Xinmei, Pan Qiwen, Mo Changgan, Li Xianshu, Liang Xueyan, Li Yan, Lan Yingnian, Chen Lingyuan
Department of Anesthesiology.
Department of Gynecology.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Jan;99(2):e18769. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000018769.
Complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI) are universal reasons for hospitalization, and highly likely to develop into sepsis or septic shock. Carbapenem antibiotics with potentially higher efficacy or with fewer and milder side effects have increased in popularity, but evidence is limited by a scarcity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different carbapenem antibiotics for cUTI. Network meta-analysis is a useful tool to compare multiple treatments when there is limited or no direct evidence available.
The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of different carbapenems with alternative antibiotics for the treatment of cUTI.
Pubmed, Medline, CENTRAL, and Embase were searched in November 2018. Studies of cUTI patients receiving carbapenem were included. We performed network meta-analysis to estimate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% credible interval (CrI) from both direct and indirect evidence; traditional meta-analysis was also performed. Primary outcomes were clinical and microbiological treatment success.
A total of 19 studies and 7380 patients were included in the analysis. Doripenem (DOPM) was associated with lower clinical treatment success rates than other carbapenems. Although the efficacy of other carbapenems by RRs with 95% CrIs did not show statistical differences, the cumulative rank probability indicated that meropenem/vaborbactam (MV), ertapenem (ETPM), and biapenem (BAPM) had higher clinical and microbiological treatment success rates; imipenem/cilastatin (IC) and MV showed higher risk of adverse events (AEs).
MV was associated with higher treatment success rates for cUTI, especially for cUTI caused by carbapenem-resistant uropathogens, but also with higher risk of AEs. Our findings suggest MV as a first-choice treatment of carbapenem-resistant cUTI. ETPM, BAPM, and meropenem (MEPM) is another reasonable choice for cUTI empiric therapy.
复杂性尿路感染(cUTI)是住院的常见原因,且极有可能发展为脓毒症或脓毒性休克。具有潜在更高疗效或更少、更轻微副作用的碳青霉烯类抗生素越来越受欢迎,但由于比较不同碳青霉烯类抗生素治疗cUTI的随机对照试验(RCT)稀缺,相关证据有限。网状Meta分析是在缺乏直接证据或直接证据有限时比较多种治疗方法的有用工具。
本研究旨在比较不同碳青霉烯类抗生素与其他抗生素治疗cUTI的疗效和安全性。
2018年11月检索了PubMed、Medline、CENTRAL和Embase。纳入接受碳青霉烯类抗生素治疗的cUTI患者的研究。我们进行网状Meta分析,以直接和间接证据估计风险比(RR)和95%可信区间(CrI);同时也进行了传统Meta分析。主要结局为临床和微生物学治疗成功。
分析共纳入19项研究和7380例患者。多利培南(DOPM)与其他碳青霉烯类抗生素相比,临床治疗成功率较低。虽然其他碳青霉烯类抗生素的RR及95%CrI的疗效未显示出统计学差异,但累积排序概率表明,美罗培南/瓦博巴坦(MV)、厄他培南(ETPM)和比阿培南(BAPM)具有更高的临床和微生物学治疗成功率;亚胺培南/西司他丁(IC)和MV显示出更高的不良事件(AE)风险。
MV治疗cUTI的成功率较高,尤其是对于耐碳青霉烯类尿路病原体引起的cUTI,但AE风险也较高。我们的研究结果表明MV是耐碳青霉烯类cUTI的首选治疗药物。ETPM、BAPM和美罗培南(MEPM)是cUTI经验性治疗的另一个合理选择。