School of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Medical Technology, Putian University, Putian, China.
Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Chi Mei Medical Center, Liouying, Taiwan.
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2021 Oct;22(8):763-770. doi: 10.1089/sur.2020.468. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam against alternative antibiotics in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. The PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, and CKNI databases were searched for relevant articles up to November 25, 2020. The primary outcome was clinical efficacy rate, and the secondary outcomes were microbiologic eradication rate, mortality rate, and adverse event (AE) risk. Twelve studies involving 1,674 patients were included. Overall, the clinical efficacy rate of cefoperazone-sulbactam and comparators was 87.7% and 81.7%, respectively, and cefoperazone-sulbactam was associated with a higher clinical efficacy rate than that the comparator (odds ratio [OR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-3.00; = 36%). Additionally, cefoperazone-sulbactam was associated with a lower clinical failure rate (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.28-0.57; = 0) and a higher clinical cure rate (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.17-2.03; = 0) than the comparators. Cefoperazone-sulbactam was associated with a higher microbiologic eradication rate than the comparator (OR 2.54; 95% CI 1.72-3.76; = 0). Finally, there was no significant difference between cefoperazone-sulbactam and the comparators in terms of mortality rate (OR 090; 95% CI 0.38-2.16; = 0) and AE risk (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.74-1.55; = 0). The clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam were similar to those of alternative antibiotics in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Therefore, cefoperazone-sulbactam could be recommended as an effective and safe antibiotic for treating intra-abdominal infections.
在这项系统评价和荟萃分析中，我们旨在评估头孢哌酮舒巴坦与其他抗生素在治疗腹腔内感染方面的临床疗效和安全性。我们检索了PubMed、Cochrane、Web of Science、Ovid Medline 和 CKNI 数据库，以获取截至 2020 年 11 月 25 日的相关文章。主要结局指标是临床疗效率，次要结局指标是微生物清除率、死亡率和不良事件（AE）风险。共纳入 12 项研究，涉及 1674 例患者。总的来说，头孢哌酮舒巴坦和对照组的临床疗效率分别为 87.7%和 81.7%，头孢哌酮舒巴坦的临床疗效率高于对照组（比值比[OR]1.98；95%置信区间[CI]1.31-3.00； = 36%）。此外，头孢哌酮舒巴坦与较低的临床失败率（OR 0.40；95%CI 0.28-0.57； = 0）和较高的临床治愈率（OR 1.54；95%CI 1.17-2.03； = 0）相关，而与对照组相比。头孢哌酮舒巴坦的微生物清除率高于对照组（OR 2.54；95%CI 1.72-3.76； = 0）。最后，头孢哌酮舒巴坦与对照组在死亡率（OR 0.90；95%CI 0.38-2.16； = 0）和 AE 风险（OR 1.07；95%CI 0.74-1.55； = 0）方面无显著差异。头孢哌酮舒巴坦与其他抗生素治疗腹腔内感染的临床疗效和安全性相似。因此，头孢哌酮舒巴坦可作为治疗腹腔内感染的一种有效、安全的抗生素。
