Suppr超能文献

基于对抗菌药物耐药性的克拉霉素与甲硝唑在一线三联根除治疗中的对比:荟萃分析

Clarithromycin Versus Metronidazole in First-Line Triple Eradication Therapy Based on Resistance to Antimicrobial Agents: Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Murata Masaki, Sugimoto Mitsushige, Mizuno Hitomi, Kanno Takeshi, Satoh Kiichi

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Shiga University of Medical Science Hospital, Otsu, Shiga 520-2192, Japan.

Department of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Kyoto Medical Center, Fushimi, Kyoto 612-8555, Japan.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2020 Feb 17;9(2):543. doi: 10.3390/jcm9020543.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

International treatment guidelines for infection recommend a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)/amoxicillin/clarithromycin (CAM) regimen (PAC) or PPI/amoxicillin/metronidazole (MNZ) regimen (PAM) as first-line therapy based on culture and sensitivity testing. As incidence rates of antimicrobial agent-resistant strains are changing year by year, it is important to reevaluate the efficacy of eradication regimens. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PAC and PAM based on different locations categorized by the reported incidence of CAM- and MNZ-resistant strains.

METHODS

Randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing eradication rates between PAC and PAM first-line treatment up to December 2018 were included. We divided RCTs into four groups based on resistance to CAM (< 15% or ≥ 15%) and MNZ (< 15% or ≥ 15%).

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies (4825 patients) were included. Overall eradication rates between PAC and PAM were similar (74.8% and 72.5%, relative risk (RR): 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.91-1.39, = 0.27) in the intention-to-treat analysis. In areas with low MNZ- and high CAM-resistance rates, PAM had a significantly higher eradication rate than PAC (92.5% vs. 70.8%, RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.13-0.68). In areas with high MNZ- and low CAM-resistance rates, the eradication rate with PAC was only 72.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall eradication rates with PAC and PAM were equivalent worldwide. In low MNZ-resistance areas, PAM may be recommended as first-line therapy. However, the efficacy of PAC may be insufficient, irrespective of susceptibility to CAM.

摘要

背景

感染的国际治疗指南推荐基于培养和药敏试验,将质子泵抑制剂(PPI)/阿莫西林/克拉霉素(CAM)方案(PAC)或PPI/阿莫西林/甲硝唑(MNZ)方案(PAM)作为一线治疗。由于抗菌药物耐药菌株的发生率逐年变化,重新评估根除方案的疗效很重要。我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估根据CAM和MNZ耐药菌株报告发生率分类的不同地区的PAC和PAM的疗效和安全性。

方法

纳入截至2018年12月比较PAC和PAM一线治疗根除率的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们根据对CAM(<15%或≥15%)和MNZ(<15%或≥15%)的耐药性将RCT分为四组。

结果

共纳入27项研究(4825例患者)。在意向性分析中,PAC和PAM的总体根除率相似(74.8%和72.5%,相对风险(RR):1.13,95%置信区间(CI):0.91-1.39,P = 0.27)。在MNZ耐药率低和CAM耐药率高的地区,PAM的根除率显著高于PAC(92.5%对70.8%,RR:0.29,95%CI:0.13-0.68)。在MNZ耐药率高和CAM耐药率低的地区,PAC的根除率仅为72.9%。

结论

全球范围内PAC和PAM的总体根除率相当。在MNZ耐药率低的地区,可推荐PAM作为一线治疗。然而,无论对CAM的敏感性如何,PAC的疗效可能不足。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6d65/7073899/bba2f343e3ba/jcm-09-00543-g001.jpg

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