University of Edinburgh Centre for Inflammation Research, Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Regional Infectious Diseases Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
J Infect Dis. 2022 Sep 4;226(4):723-728. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiac219.
We systematically evaluated randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). There was intertrial heterogeneity in cohort characteristics, including bacteremia source, complicated SAB, and comorbidities. Reporting of cohort characteristics was itself variable, including bacteremia source and illness severity. Selection bias was introduced by exclusion criteria relating to comorbidities, illness severity, infection types, and source control. Mortality was lower in RCT control arms compared with observational cohorts. Differences in outcome definitions impedes meta-analysis. These issues complicate the interpretation and application of SAB RCT results. The value of these trials should be maximized by a standardized approach to recruitment, definitions, and reporting.
我们系统地评估了耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症(SAB)的随机对照试验(RCT)。队列特征存在试验间异质性,包括菌血症源、复杂 SAB 和合并症。队列特征的报告本身也存在差异,包括菌血症源和疾病严重程度。排除标准与合并症、疾病严重程度、感染类型和源头控制有关,这引入了选择偏倚。与观察队列相比,RCT 对照组的死亡率较低。结局定义的差异妨碍了荟萃分析。这些问题使 SAB RCT 结果的解释和应用变得复杂。通过标准化的招募、定义和报告方法,可以最大限度地提高这些试验的价值。