Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Clin Infect Dis. 2024 Nov 22;79(5):1162-1171. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciae379.
Guidelines recommend adjunctive gentamicin for the treatment of Enterococcus faecalis infective endocarditis (EFIE) despite a risk of toxicity. We sought to revisit the evidence for adjunctive therapy in EFIE and to synthesize the comparative safety and effectiveness of aminoglycosides versus ceftriaxone by systematic review and meta-analysis.
For historical context, we reviewed seminal case series and in vitro studies on the evolution from penicillin monotherapy to modern-day regimens for EFIE. Next, we searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception to 16 January 2024 for studies of EFIE that compared adjunctive aminoglycosides versus ceftriaxone or adjunctive versus monotherapy. Where possible, clinical outcomes were compared between regimens using random effects meta-analysis. Otherwise, data were narratively summarized.
The meta-analysis was limited to 10 observational studies at high risk of bias (911 patients). Relative to adjunctive ceftriaxone, gentamicin had similar all-cause mortality (risk difference [RD], -0.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.0 to 3.5), relapse (RD, -0.1%; 95% CI, -2.4 to 2.3), and treatment failure (RD, 1.1%; 95% CI, -1.6 to 3.7) but higher discontinuation due to toxicity (RD, 26.3%; 95% CI, 19.8 to 32.7). The 3 studies that compared adjunctive therapy to monotherapy included only 30 monotherapy patients, and heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis.
Adjunctive ceftriaxone appeared to be equally effective and less toxic than gentamicin for the treatment of EFIE. The existing evidence does not clearly establish the superiority of either adjunctive therapy or monotherapy. Pending randomized evidence, if adjunctive therapy is to be used, ceftriaxone appears to be a reasonable option.
尽管存在毒性风险,指南仍建议在治疗粪肠球菌感染性心内膜炎(EFIE)时使用庆大霉素作为辅助治疗。我们试图重新审视 EFIE 辅助治疗的证据,并通过系统评价和荟萃分析综合比较氨基糖苷类药物与头孢曲松的安全性和有效性。
为了了解历史背景,我们回顾了关于青霉素单一疗法向现代 EFIE 治疗方案演变的重要病例系列和体外研究。接下来,我们在 MEDLINE 和 Embase 数据库中从建库至 2024 年 1 月 16 日搜索了比较 EFIE 辅助氨基糖苷类药物与头孢曲松或辅助与单一疗法的研究。在可能的情况下,我们使用随机效应荟萃分析比较了不同方案的临床结局。否则,我们对数据进行了叙述性总结。
荟萃分析仅限于高偏倚风险的 10 项观察性研究(911 名患者)。与辅助头孢曲松相比,庆大霉素的全因死亡率(风险差 [RD],-0.8%;95%置信区间 [CI],-5.0 至 3.5)、复发(RD,-0.1%;95% CI,-2.4 至 2.3)和治疗失败(RD,1.1%;95% CI,-1.6 至 3.7)相似,但毒性导致停药的比例更高(RD,26.3%;95% CI,19.8 至 32.7)。比较辅助治疗与单一治疗的 3 项研究仅纳入了 30 名单一治疗患者,且存在异质性,因此无法进行荟萃分析。
辅助头孢曲松治疗 EFIE 的效果似乎与庆大霉素相当,且毒性更小。现有证据并未明确确定辅助治疗或单一治疗的优越性。在等待随机对照试验证据的情况下,如果要使用辅助治疗,头孢曲松似乎是一个合理的选择。