Mellett Madeline, Lawandi Alexander, Caya Chelsea, Lee Todd C, Babiker Ahmed, Papenburg Jesse, Yansouni Cedric P, Cheng Matthew P
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Department of Critical Care Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Québec, USA.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2025 Aug 6;69(8):e0119924. doi: 10.1128/aac.01199-24. Epub 2025 Jun 17.
Antimicrobial combinations have been extensively evaluated to identify synergistic combinations for clinical use. Despite the available literature, no studies comprehensively summarize the findings for antimicrobial combinations against . We performed a systematic review to identify synergistic combinations that may be beneficial for clinical use against . The PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were queried from inception to February 2024 for studies of assays evaluating two antimicrobials in combination against isolates of . Studies were included if they used common methods to determine synergy including time-kill assays, checkerboard assays, or the combined gradient diffusion method. The proportion of isolates for which synergy was identified was compared for different antimicrobial combinations. Two hundred sixty-five studies were included for analysis. One hundred forty-two studies evaluated synergy against methicillin-resistant (MRSA), 31 against methicillin-susceptible (MSSA), and 92 assessed synergy against both MRSA and MSSA, or did not define the methicillin susceptibility profile of the isolates studied. Time-kill assays ( = 176) and checkerboard assays ( = 158) were the most frequently used methods, with few studies evaluating synergy using the combined gradient diffusion method ( = 13). The proportion of synergy varied based on the antimicrobial combination and isolate being evaluated. Antimicrobial synergy has been extensively studied for , with combinations of glycopeptides and cephalosporins being studied most frequently. Future evaluations of synergy for should focus on antimicrobial combinations with strong rationales and robust potential for clinical use.
抗菌药物联合使用已得到广泛评估,以确定可用于临床的协同组合。尽管有相关文献,但尚无研究全面总结针对……的抗菌药物联合使用的研究结果。我们进行了一项系统综述,以确定可能对临床治疗有益的协同组合。检索了PubMed、Cochrane和Web of Science数据库,从建库至2024年2月,查找评估两种抗菌药物联合用于……分离株的检测方法的研究。如果研究使用了确定协同作用的常用方法,包括时间杀菌试验、棋盘法或联合梯度扩散法,则纳入研究。比较了不同抗菌药物组合中确定存在协同作用的分离株比例。纳入265项研究进行分析。142项研究评估了对耐甲氧西林……(MRSA)的协同作用,31项评估了对甲氧西林敏感……(MSSA)的协同作用,92项评估了对MRSA和MSSA两者的协同作用,或未明确所研究分离株的甲氧西林敏感性情况。时间杀菌试验(n = 176)和棋盘法(n = 158)是最常用的方法,很少有研究使用联合梯度扩散法评估协同作用(n = 13)。协同作用的比例因抗菌药物组合和所评估的分离株而异。针对……的抗菌药物协同作用已得到广泛研究,糖肽类和头孢菌素类的联合使用研究最为频繁。未来对……协同作用的评估应侧重于具有充分理论依据和强大临床应用潜力的抗菌药物组合。