Wu Man, Yang Xue, Tian Jinhui, Fan Hong, Zhang Yonggang
Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Front Pharmacol. 2021 Oct 19;12:680178. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.680178. eCollection 2021.
Considering the global burden of pulmonary infections, there is an urgent need for optimal empirical antimicrobial therapy strategies for pulmonary infections, which should rely on reliable evidence. Therefore, we aim to investigate the optimal treatment options for pulmonary infections in adults and assess the strength of that evidence. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and China Biology Medicine disc to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on antimicrobial treatments for pulmonary infections. The outcomes of the included meta-analyses should include all-cause mortality or clinical treatment success. For each meta-analysis, we estimated relative risk (RR) with 95% CI. We also created an evidence map to show the efficacy of each antimicrobial treatment strategy and the certainty of the evidence. Twenty-six meta-analyses and two new RCTs were included that contained 31 types of antimicrobial therapy strategies. We found that carbapenems were related to lower mortality than other β-lactams or fluoroquinolones alone or in combination with aminoglycosides for HAP patients (RR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58-0.99). There was no statistical difference in all-cause mortality between the other antimicrobial therapy strategies. As for clinical cure, treatment with fluoroquinolones was associated with better success versus macrolides or β-lactams alone for CAP patients in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (RR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.02-1.47) and clinically evaluable (CE) population (RR 1.37, 95% CI: 1.11-1.68). Treatment with carbapenems showed a better clinical cure over non-carbapenems for VAP patients (RR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.05-1.4). Adjunctive inhaled antibiotics compared with intravenous antibiotics alone showed a benefit for VAP (RR 1.2, 95% CI: 1.05-1.35). In addition, adjunctive nebulized aminoglycoside for nosocomial pneumonia was associated with a higher cure rate versus intravenous antibiotics alone in the ITT population (RR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04-1.57), while no statistical difference in clinical cure was observed between other intervention groups. We cannot evaluate which antibiotic is the best choice for the treatment of pulmonary infection. Carbapenems or adjunctive inhaled antibiotics showed a reasonable choice for HAP or VAP. However, we do not find a statistical difference between most antimicrobial therapy strategies for CAP patients.
鉴于肺部感染的全球负担,迫切需要针对肺部感染的最佳经验性抗菌治疗策略,而这应基于可靠证据。因此,我们旨在研究成人肺部感染的最佳治疗方案,并评估该证据的强度。我们检索了PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和中国生物医学数据库,以识别聚焦于肺部感染抗菌治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)的系统评价和荟萃分析。纳入的荟萃分析的结果应包括全因死亡率或临床治疗成功率。对于每项荟萃分析,我们估计了95%置信区间的相对风险(RR)。我们还创建了一个证据图,以展示每种抗菌治疗策略的疗效和证据的确定性。纳入了26项荟萃分析和2项新的RCT,其中包含31种抗菌治疗策略。我们发现,对于医院获得性肺炎(HAP)患者,碳青霉烯类药物与单独使用其他β-内酰胺类药物或氟喹诺酮类药物,或与氨基糖苷类药物联合使用相比,死亡率更低(RR 0.76,95%CI:0.58-0.99)。其他抗菌治疗策略之间的全因死亡率无统计学差异。至于临床治愈情况,在意向性治疗(ITT)人群(RR 1.22,95%CI:1.02-1.47)和临床可评估(CE)人群(RR 1.37,95%CI:1.11-1.68)中,对于社区获得性肺炎(CAP)患者,使用氟喹诺酮类药物治疗与单独使用大环内酯类药物或β-内酰胺类药物相比,临床治愈率更高。对于呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)患者,使用碳青霉烯类药物治疗比不使用碳青霉烯类药物显示出更好的临床治愈率(RR 1.21,95%CI:1.05-1.4)。与单独静脉使用抗生素相比,辅助吸入抗生素对VAP有益(RR 1.2,95%CI:1.05-1.35)。此外,在ITT人群中,对于医院内肺炎,辅助雾化吸入氨基糖苷类药物与单独静脉使用抗生素相比,治愈率更高(RR 1.28,95%CI:1.04-1.57),而其他干预组之间在临床治愈率方面未观察到统计学差异。我们无法评估哪种抗生素是治疗肺部感染的最佳选择。碳青霉烯类药物或辅助吸入抗生素对于HAP或VAP是合理的选择。然而,我们发现对于CAP患者,大多数抗菌治疗策略之间没有统计学差异。