治疗人工关节感染的静脉注射抗生素持续时间:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.8 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Journal of Bone and Joint Infection Pub Date : 2022-09-19 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5194/jbji-7-191-2022
Nour Bouji, Sijin Wen, Matthew J Dietz
{"title":"治疗人工关节感染的静脉注射抗生素持续时间:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Nour Bouji, Sijin Wen, Matthew J Dietz","doi":"10.5194/jbji-7-191-2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: Long antibiotic courses, including intravenous (IV) and oral administrations, are utilized in prosthetic joint infection (PJI) treatment. This meta-analysis examines the non-inferiority of short courses ( <math><mo><</mo></math>  4 weeks) of IV antibiotics compared to long courses in treating PJI. Critical review of IV treatment is necessary due to the clinical, physical, and financial burden associated with it and its continued prolonged use in the US without much evidence to support the practice. <b>Methods</b>: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), databases were searched using predefined medical subject headings (MeSH). <b>Results</b>: The nine included studies reported 521 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and 530 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). There was no significant difference in the overall success rate in short- vs. long-duration IV antibiotics for PJI treatment: odds ratio (OR) of 1.65, 95 % confidence interval (CI) of 0.78-3.46, and <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0</mn></mrow> </math> .18. However, due to the moderate to high heterogeneity ( <math> <mrow><msup><mi>I</mi> <mn>2</mn></msup> <mo>=</mo> <mn>68</mn></mrow> </math>  %, <math><mi>p</mi></math>   <math><mo><</mo></math>  0.01) amongst studies, an adjusted success rate was calculated after the exclusion of two studies. This showed a statistically significant difference between both groups (OR of 2.45, 95 % CI of 1.21-4.96, <math><mi>p</mi></math>   <math><mo><</mo></math>  0.001) favoring a short course of antibiotics and reflecting a more homogenous population ( <math> <mrow><msup><mi>I</mi> <mn>2</mn></msup> <mo>=</mo> <mn>51</mn></mrow> </math>  %, <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0</mn></mrow> </math> .06). <b>Conclusion</b>: This study highlights the limited data available for evaluating IV antibiotic duration in the setting of PJI. We found that a shorter duration of IV antibiotics was non-inferior to a longer duration, with an improved OR of 2.45 for treatment success, likely shortening inpatient stay as well as lessening side effects and antimicrobial resistance with a lower cost to patients and overall healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":15271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9562697/pdf/jbji-7-191.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intravenous antibiotic duration in the treatment of prosthetic joint infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Nour Bouji, Sijin Wen, Matthew J Dietz\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/jbji-7-191-2022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: Long antibiotic courses, including intravenous (IV) and oral administrations, are utilized in prosthetic joint infection (PJI) treatment. This meta-analysis examines the non-inferiority of short courses ( <math><mo><</mo></math>  4 weeks) of IV antibiotics compared to long courses in treating PJI. Critical review of IV treatment is necessary due to the clinical, physical, and financial burden associated with it and its continued prolonged use in the US without much evidence to support the practice. <b>Methods</b>: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), databases were searched using predefined medical subject headings (MeSH). <b>Results</b>: The nine included studies reported 521 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and 530 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). There was no significant difference in the overall success rate in short- vs. long-duration IV antibiotics for PJI treatment: odds ratio (OR) of 1.65, 95 % confidence interval (CI) of 0.78-3.46, and <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0</mn></mrow> </math> .18. However, due to the moderate to high heterogeneity ( <math> <mrow><msup><mi>I</mi> <mn>2</mn></msup> <mo>=</mo> <mn>68</mn></mrow> </math>  %, <math><mi>p</mi></math>   <math><mo><</mo></math>  0.01) amongst studies, an adjusted success rate was calculated after the exclusion of two studies. This showed a statistically significant difference between both groups (OR of 2.45, 95 % CI of 1.21-4.96, <math><mi>p</mi></math>   <math><mo><</mo></math>  0.001) favoring a short course of antibiotics and reflecting a more homogenous population ( <math> <mrow><msup><mi>I</mi> <mn>2</mn></msup> <mo>=</mo> <mn>51</mn></mrow> </math>  %, <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0</mn></mrow> </math> .06). <b>Conclusion</b>: This study highlights the limited data available for evaluating IV antibiotic duration in the setting of PJI. We found that a shorter duration of IV antibiotics was non-inferior to a longer duration, with an improved OR of 2.45 for treatment success, likely shortening inpatient stay as well as lessening side effects and antimicrobial resistance with a lower cost to patients and overall healthcare.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9562697/pdf/jbji-7-191.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-191-2022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-191-2022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:在假体关节感染(PJI)治疗中,使用的抗生素疗程较长,包括静脉注射(IV)和口服给药。本荟萃分析研究了短疗程(4 周)静脉注射抗生素与长疗程相比在治疗 PJI 方面的非劣效性。由于静脉注射治疗带来的临床、身体和经济负担,以及美国在没有太多证据支持的情况下继续长期使用静脉注射治疗,因此有必要对静脉注射治疗进行严格审查。方法:按照《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》(PRISMA),使用预定义的医学主题词(MeSH)检索数据库。结果纳入的九项研究报告了 521 例全髋关节置换术 (THAs) 和 530 例全膝关节置换术 (TKAs)。短期与长期静脉注射抗生素治疗 PJI 的总体成功率无明显差异:几率比 (OR) 为 1.65,95 % 置信区间 (CI) 为 0.78-3.46,P = 0.18。然而,由于各研究之间存在中度到高度异质性(I 2 = 68 %,P 0.01),因此在排除两项研究后计算了调整后的成功率。结果显示,两组之间存在显著的统计学差异(OR 为 2.45,95 % CI 为 1.21-4.96,P 0.001),均倾向于使用短程抗生素,并反映出人群的同质性较高(I 2 = 51 %,P = 0.06)。结论本研究强调了在评估 PJI 时静脉注射抗生素疗程的可用数据有限。我们发现,静脉注射抗生素的疗程短并不比疗程长差,治疗成功率提高了 2.45,可能缩短了住院时间,减少了副作用和抗菌药耐药性,降低了患者和整体医疗成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Intravenous antibiotic duration in the treatment of prosthetic joint infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Long antibiotic courses, including intravenous (IV) and oral administrations, are utilized in prosthetic joint infection (PJI) treatment. This meta-analysis examines the non-inferiority of short courses ( <  4 weeks) of IV antibiotics compared to long courses in treating PJI. Critical review of IV treatment is necessary due to the clinical, physical, and financial burden associated with it and its continued prolonged use in the US without much evidence to support the practice. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), databases were searched using predefined medical subject headings (MeSH). Results: The nine included studies reported 521 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and 530 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). There was no significant difference in the overall success rate in short- vs. long-duration IV antibiotics for PJI treatment: odds ratio (OR) of 1.65, 95 % confidence interval (CI) of 0.78-3.46, and p = 0 .18. However, due to the moderate to high heterogeneity ( I 2 = 68  %, p<  0.01) amongst studies, an adjusted success rate was calculated after the exclusion of two studies. This showed a statistically significant difference between both groups (OR of 2.45, 95 % CI of 1.21-4.96, p<  0.001) favoring a short course of antibiotics and reflecting a more homogenous population ( I 2 = 51  %, p = 0 .06). Conclusion: This study highlights the limited data available for evaluating IV antibiotic duration in the setting of PJI. We found that a shorter duration of IV antibiotics was non-inferior to a longer duration, with an improved OR of 2.45 for treatment success, likely shortening inpatient stay as well as lessening side effects and antimicrobial resistance with a lower cost to patients and overall healthcare.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Musculoskeletal manifestations of lower-extremity coccidioidomycosis: a case series Emergence of rifampicin-resistant staphylococci on the skin and nose of rifampicin-treated patients with an orthopaedic-device-related infection What is the agreement between principles and practice of antibiotic stewardship in the management of diabetic foot infection: an in-hospital quality control study. It is time for a unified definition of native vertebral osteomyelitis: a framework proposal. Ureaplasma urealyticum osteomyelitis of the greater trochanter in a patient with multiple sclerosis using ocrelizumab – a case report
×
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