The efficacy and safety of oral antibiotic treatment in patients with chronic low back pain and Modic changes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS JOR Spine Pub Date : 2023-09-19 DOI:10.1002/jsp2.1281
Arnold Y. L. Wong, G. Michael Mallow, Sabina M. Pinto, Alexander L. Hornung, Samuel S. Rudisill, Khaled Aboushaala, Peter M. Udby, Howard S. An, Dino Samartzis
{"title":"The efficacy and safety of oral antibiotic treatment in patients with chronic low back pain and Modic changes: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Arnold Y. L. Wong,&nbsp;G. Michael Mallow,&nbsp;Sabina M. Pinto,&nbsp;Alexander L. Hornung,&nbsp;Samuel S. Rudisill,&nbsp;Khaled Aboushaala,&nbsp;Peter M. Udby,&nbsp;Howard S. An,&nbsp;Dino Samartzis","doi":"10.1002/jsp2.1281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of oral antibiotic intervention for chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients with/without type-1 Modic changes (MC1).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline were searched from inception to March 3, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-RCTs that investigated the effectiveness or safety of oral antibiotics in treating CLBP patients were eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts, full-text articles, and extracted data. The methodological quality of each included article were evaluated by RoB2 and NIH quality assessment tools. The quality of evidence was appraised by GRADE. Meta-analyses were performed, where applicable. A subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the RCTs and case series separately, and to evaluate the effect of removing a low-quality RCT.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Three RCTs and four case series were included. All Amoxicillin-clavulanate/Amoxicillin treatments lasted for approximately 3 months. Moderate- and low-quality evidence suggested that antibiotic was significantly better than placebo in improving disability and quality of life in CLBP patients with MC1 at 12-month follow-up, respectively. Low-quality evidence from meta-analyses of RCTs showed that oral antibiotic was significantly better than placebo in improving pain and disability in CLBP patients with MC1 immediately post-treatment. Very low-quality evidence from the case series suggested that oral Amoxicillin-clavulanate significantly improved LBP/leg pain, and LBP-related disability. Conversely, low-quality evidence found that oral Amoxicillin alone was not significantly better than placebo in improving global perceived health in patients with CLBP at the 12-month follow-up. Additionally, oral antibiotic users had significantly more adverse effects than placebo users.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although oral antibiotics were statistically superior to placebo in reducing LBP-related disability in patients with CLBP and concomitant MC1, its clinical significance remains uncertain. Future large-scale high-quality RCTs are warranted to validate the effectiveness of antibiotics in individuals with CLBP.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14876,"journal":{"name":"JOR Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jsp2.1281","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOR Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsp2.1281","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of oral antibiotic intervention for chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients with/without type-1 Modic changes (MC1).

Methods

AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline were searched from inception to March 3, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-RCTs that investigated the effectiveness or safety of oral antibiotics in treating CLBP patients were eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts, full-text articles, and extracted data. The methodological quality of each included article were evaluated by RoB2 and NIH quality assessment tools. The quality of evidence was appraised by GRADE. Meta-analyses were performed, where applicable. A subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the RCTs and case series separately, and to evaluate the effect of removing a low-quality RCT.

Results

Three RCTs and four case series were included. All Amoxicillin-clavulanate/Amoxicillin treatments lasted for approximately 3 months. Moderate- and low-quality evidence suggested that antibiotic was significantly better than placebo in improving disability and quality of life in CLBP patients with MC1 at 12-month follow-up, respectively. Low-quality evidence from meta-analyses of RCTs showed that oral antibiotic was significantly better than placebo in improving pain and disability in CLBP patients with MC1 immediately post-treatment. Very low-quality evidence from the case series suggested that oral Amoxicillin-clavulanate significantly improved LBP/leg pain, and LBP-related disability. Conversely, low-quality evidence found that oral Amoxicillin alone was not significantly better than placebo in improving global perceived health in patients with CLBP at the 12-month follow-up. Additionally, oral antibiotic users had significantly more adverse effects than placebo users.

Conclusions

Although oral antibiotics were statistically superior to placebo in reducing LBP-related disability in patients with CLBP and concomitant MC1, its clinical significance remains uncertain. Future large-scale high-quality RCTs are warranted to validate the effectiveness of antibiotics in individuals with CLBP.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
口服抗生素治疗慢性腰背痛和 Modic 病变患者的有效性和安全性:系统回顾与荟萃分析
背景 本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在总结有关口服抗生素干预患有/未患有 1 型莫迪病(MC1)的慢性腰背痛(CLBP)患者的有效性和安全性的证据。 方法 检索从开始到 2023 年 3 月 3 日的 AMED、CINAHL、Cochrane Library、Embase 和 Medline。研究口服抗生素治疗 CLBP 患者的有效性或安全性的随机对照试验 (RCT) 或非 RCT 均符合纳入条件。两名独立审稿人筛选摘要、全文并提取数据。每篇纳入文章的方法学质量均由 RoB2 和 NIH 质量评估工具进行评估。证据质量采用 GRADE 进行评估。在适用的情况下进行了元分析。进行了亚组分析,分别评估了研究性试验和病例系列,并评估了剔除一项低质量研究性试验的效果。 结果 共纳入了 3 项研究性试验和 4 个病例系列。所有阿莫西林-克拉维酸/阿莫西林的疗程均为 3 个月左右。中度和低质量证据表明,在随访 12 个月时,抗生素在改善 MC1 CLBP 患者的残疾和生活质量方面分别明显优于安慰剂。对研究性试验进行荟萃分析后得出的低质量证据表明,口服抗生素在改善MC1慢性膀胱炎患者治疗后即刻的疼痛和残疾状况方面明显优于安慰剂。来自病例系列的极低质量证据表明,口服阿莫西林-克拉维酸能明显改善枸橼酸盐/腿痛以及与枸橼酸盐相关的残疾。相反,低质量的证据表明,在 12 个月的随访中,单用口服阿莫西林在改善慢性阻塞性肺病患者的总体健康感知方面并没有明显优于安慰剂。此外,口服抗生素使用者的不良反应明显多于安慰剂使用者。 结论 虽然口服抗生素在减少CLBP和并发MC1患者的LBP相关残疾方面在统计学上优于安慰剂,但其临床意义仍不确定。今后有必要进行大规模、高质量的 RCT 研究,以验证抗生素对 CLBP 患者的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JOR Spine
JOR Spine ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
18.90%
发文量
42
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
The proteomic landscape of extracellular vesicles derived from human intervertebral disc cells Finite element analysis of two-level discontinuous cervical hybrid revision surgery strategy to reduce biomechanical responses of adjacent segments A novel spine tester TO GO Identifying critical modules and biomarkers of intervertebral disc degeneration by using weighted gene co-expression network Gut microbiome dysbiosis is associated with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis in symptomatic patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1