Long versus short course anti-microbial therapy of uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: a systematic review

IF 10.9 1区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Clinical Microbiology and Infection Pub Date : 2024-05-30 DOI:10.1016/j.cmi.2024.05.015
{"title":"Long versus short course anti-microbial therapy of uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: a systematic review","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.cmi.2024.05.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Current guidelines recommend at least 2 weeks duration of antibiotic therapy (DOT) for patients with uncomplicated <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em> bacteraemia (SAB) but the evidence for this recommendation is unclear.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To perform a systematic literature review assessing current evidence for recommended DOT for patients with SAB.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The following are the methods used for this study.</p></div><div><h3>Data sources</h3><p>We searched MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Database and <span><span>clinicaltrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg></span> from inception to March 30, 2024. References of eligible studies were screened and experts in the field contacted for additional articles.</p></div><div><h3>Study eligibility criteria</h3><p>All clinical studies, regardless of design, publication status and language.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Adult patients with uncomplicated SAB.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>Long (&gt;14 days; &gt;18 days; 11–16 days) vs. short (≤14 days; 10–18 days; 6–10 days, respectively) DOT with the DOT being defined as the first until the last day of antibiotic therapy.</p></div><div><h3>Assessment of risk of bias</h3><p>Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I-tool.</p></div><div><h3>Methods of data synthesis</h3><p>The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Only studies presenting results of adjusted analyses for mortality were included. Data synthesis could not be performed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eleven nonrandomized studies were identified that fulfilled the pre-defined inclusion criteria, of which three studies reported adjusted effect ratios. Only these were included in the final analysis. We did not find any RCT. Two studies with 1230 patients reported the primary endpoint 90-day all-cause mortality. Neither found a statistically significant superiority for longer (&gt;14 days; 11–16 days) or shorter DOT (≤14 days; 6–10 days, respectively) for patients with uncomplicated SAB. Two studies investigated the secondary endpoint 30-day all-cause mortality (&gt;18 days; 11–16 days vs. 10–18 days; 6–10 days, respectively) and did not find a statistically significant difference. All included studies had a moderate risk of bias.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Sound evidence that supports any duration of antibiotic treatment for patients with uncomplicated SAB is lacking.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10444,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Microbiology and Infection","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1198743X24002520/pdfft?md5=6402721d770d4b012da704165d422475&pid=1-s2.0-S1198743X24002520-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Microbiology and Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1198743X24002520","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Current guidelines recommend at least 2 weeks duration of antibiotic therapy (DOT) for patients with uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) but the evidence for this recommendation is unclear.

Objectives

To perform a systematic literature review assessing current evidence for recommended DOT for patients with SAB.

Methods

The following are the methods used for this study.

Data sources

We searched MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Database and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to March 30, 2024. References of eligible studies were screened and experts in the field contacted for additional articles.

Study eligibility criteria

All clinical studies, regardless of design, publication status and language.

Participants

Adult patients with uncomplicated SAB.

Interventions

Long (>14 days; >18 days; 11–16 days) vs. short (≤14 days; 10–18 days; 6–10 days, respectively) DOT with the DOT being defined as the first until the last day of antibiotic therapy.

Assessment of risk of bias

Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I-tool.

Methods of data synthesis

The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Only studies presenting results of adjusted analyses for mortality were included. Data synthesis could not be performed.

Results

Eleven nonrandomized studies were identified that fulfilled the pre-defined inclusion criteria, of which three studies reported adjusted effect ratios. Only these were included in the final analysis. We did not find any RCT. Two studies with 1230 patients reported the primary endpoint 90-day all-cause mortality. Neither found a statistically significant superiority for longer (>14 days; 11–16 days) or shorter DOT (≤14 days; 6–10 days, respectively) for patients with uncomplicated SAB. Two studies investigated the secondary endpoint 30-day all-cause mortality (>18 days; 11–16 days vs. 10–18 days; 6–10 days, respectively) and did not find a statistically significant difference. All included studies had a moderate risk of bias.

Conclusions

Sound evidence that supports any duration of antibiotic treatment for patients with uncomplicated SAB is lacking.

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
无并发症金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症的长程与短程抗微生物治疗:系统综述。
背景:现行指南建议无并发症金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症(SAB)患者至少接受两周的抗生素治疗(DOT),但该建议的证据尚不明确:进行系统性文献综述,评估推荐 SAB 患者使用 DOT 的现有证据:方法:数据来源:我们检索了从开始到 2024 年 3 月 30 日的 MEDLINE、ISI Web of Science、Cochrane 数据库和 clinicaltrials.gov。我们筛选了符合条件的研究的参考文献,并联系了该领域的专家以获取更多文章:所有临床研究,无论其设计、出版状态和语言:干预:干预措施:长期(>14 天;>18 天;11-16 天)与短期(分别为≤14 天;10-18 天;6-10 天)DOT,DOT 的定义是抗生素治疗的第一天至最后一天:采用 ROBINS-I 工具评估偏倚风险:主要结果为 90 天全因死亡率。仅纳入了提供死亡率调整分析结果的研究。无法进行数据综合:确定了 11 项符合预定纳入标准的非随机研究,其中 3 项研究报告了调整后的效应比。只有这些研究被纳入最终分析。我们没有发现任何 RCT 研究。有两项研究报告了主要终点 90 天全因死亡率,共涉及 1,230 名患者。对于无并发症的 SAB 患者,这两项研究均未发现较长(>14 天;11-16 天)或较短(≤14 天;分别为 6-10 天)的 DOT 有明显的统计学优势。两项研究调查了次要终点 30 天全因死亡率(分别为 >18;11-16 天 vs. 10-18;6-10 天),未发现统计学上的显著差异。所有纳入的研究均存在中度偏倚风险:结论:目前尚缺乏可靠的证据支持对无并发症的 SAB 患者使用任何疗程的抗生素治疗。
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
CiteScore
25.30
自引率
2.10%
发文量
441
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Microbiology and Infection (CMI) is a monthly journal published by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. It focuses on peer-reviewed papers covering basic and applied research in microbiology, infectious diseases, virology, parasitology, immunology, and epidemiology as they relate to therapy and diagnostics.
期刊最新文献
Real-world effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir in non-hospitalised adults with Covid-19: a population-based, retrospective cohort study cohort study. A phase 3 randomized trial of sulopenem vs. ertapenem in patients with complicated intraabdominal infections. Re: 'Heightened incidence of adverse events associated with a live attenuated varicella vaccine strain that lacks critical genetic polymorphisms in ORF62' by Kang et al. Epidemiology of human metapneumovirus among children with severe or very severe pneumonia in high pneumonia burden settings: the PERCH study experience. 'Measurement of circulating viral antigens post-SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multicohort study' - Author's reply.
×
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