scholarly journals A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Antibiotic Treatment Duration for Bacteremia Due to Enterobacteriaceae

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giannoula S. Tansarli ◽  
Nikolaos Andreatos ◽  
Elina E. Pliakos ◽  
Eleftherios Mylonakis
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Antibiotic Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Short Course ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Studies ◽  
Long Course

ABSTRACT The duration of antibiotic therapy for bacteremia due to Enterobacteriaceae is not well defined. We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes with shorter- versus longer-course treatment. We performed a systematic search of the PubMed and EMBASE databases through May 2018. Studies presenting comparative outcomes between patients receiving antibiotic treatment for ≤10 days (“short-course”) and those treated for >10 days (“long-course”) were considered eligible. Four retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial comprising 2,865 patients met the inclusion criteria. The short- and long-course antibiotic treatments did not differ in 30-day all-cause mortality (1,374 patients; risk ratio [RR] = 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.43), 90-day all-cause mortality (1,750 patients; RR = 1.16; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.66), clinical cure (1,080 patients; RR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.08), or relapse at 90 days (1,750 patients; RR = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.67). In patients with bacteremia due to Enterobacteriaceae, the short- and long-course antibiotic treatments did not differ significantly in terms of clinical outcomes. Further well-designed studies are needed before treatment for 10 days or less is adopted in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Antibiotic treatment duration for patients with bloodstream infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuting Li ◽  
Juan Yang ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Jianxing Guo ◽  
Dong Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Antibiotic Treatment ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Source Control ◽  
Short Course ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Long Course

Abstract Objectives: The optimal duration of therapy for primary bloodstream infection (BSI) and BSI secondary to major organ system infections has been poorly defined. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of short (≤10 days)and long course(>10 days) of antibiotic treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with BSI.Methods: We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) and cohort studies from inception to the 1st of October 2020. We included studies involving patients with BSI. All authors reported our primary outcome of all-cause mortality and clearly comparing short versus long course of antibiotic treatment with clinically relevant secondary outcomes(source control and relapse). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: Six studies including 3593 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the all-cause mortality between two groups (OR=1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.48; P=0.52; Chi2=7.57; I2=34%) . Secondary outcomes demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference in the source control(OR=0.82; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.10; P=0.18; Chi2=2.68; I2=25%)and relapse(OR=1.20; 95%CI,0.71 to 2.01; P=0.49; Chi2=0.26; I2=0%) between two groups. Conclusions: Short course of antibiotic treatment is not associated with either an increased risk of mortality or an increased odds of relapse compared with longer antibiotic treatment course for BSI. Furthermore, short course of antibiotic therapy is non-inferior to long course in terms of source control. Further large-scale RCTs are still required to confirm these results.

Short-course versus long-course antibiotics in prosthetic joint infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of one randomized controlled trial plus nine observational studies

2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (9) ◽  
pp. 2507-2516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hung-Teng Yen ◽  
Ronan W Hsieh ◽  
Chung-yen Huang ◽  
Tzu-Chun Hsu ◽  
Timothy Yeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Joint Infections ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Short Course ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infections ◽  
Long Course

Abstract Background Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) often require long-course antibiotic therapy. However, recent studies argue against the current practice and raise concerns such as the development of antibiotic resistance, side effects of medications and medical costs. Objectives To review and compare the outcomes of short-course and long-course antibiotics in PJIs. Methods We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis using a predefined search term in PubMed and EMBASE databases. Studies that met the inclusion criteria from inception to June 2018 were included. The quality of the included studies was assessed. Results A total of 10 articles and 856 patients were analysed, comprising 9 observational studies and 1 randomized controlled trial. Our meta-analysis showed no significant difference between short-course and long-course antibiotics (relative risk = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.62–1.22). Additionally, the older the studied group was, the more short-course antibiotics were favoured. Conclusions When treating PJI patients following debridement, antibiotics and implant retention, an 8 week course of antibiotic therapy for total hip arthroplasty and a 75 day course for total knee arthroplasty may be a safe approach. For two-stage exchange, a shorter duration of antibiotic treatment during implant-free periods is also generally safe with the usage of antibiotic-loaded cement spacers.

scholarly journals Short- vs. Long-Course Antibiotic Treatment for Acute Streptococcal Pharyngitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Antibiotics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 733
Author(s):  
Anna Engell Holm ◽  
Carl Llor ◽  
Lars Bjerrum ◽  
Gloria Cordoba
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Antibiotic Treatment ◽  
Clinical Cure ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Streptococcal Pharyngitis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Short Course ◽  
Long Course

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of short courses of antibiotic therapy for patients with acute streptococcal pharyngitis. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials comparing short-course antibiotic therapy (≤5 days) with long-course antibiotic therapy (≥7 days) for patients with streptococcal pharyngitis were included. Two primary outcomes: early clinical cure and early bacterial eradication. RESULTS: Fifty randomized clinical trials were included. Overall, short-course antibiotic treatment was as effective as long-course antibiotic treatment for early clinical cure (odds ratio (OR) 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.15). Subgroup analysis showed that short-course penicillin was less effective for early clinical cure (OR 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.82) and bacteriological eradication (OR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.61) in comparison to long-course penicillin. Short-course macrolides were equally effective, compared to long-course penicillin. Finally, short-course cephalosporin was more effective for early clinical cure (OR 1.48; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.96) and early microbiological cure (OR 1.60; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.27) in comparison to long-course penicillin. In total, 1211 (17.7%) participants assigned to short-course antibiotic therapy, and 893 (12.3%) cases assigned to long-course, developed adverse events (OR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.68). CONCLUSIONS: Macrolides and cephalosporins belong to the list of “Highest Priority Critically Important Antimicrobials”; hence, long-course penicillin V should remain as the first line antibiotic for the management of patients with streptococcal pharyngitis as far as the benefits of using these two types of antibiotics do not outweigh the harms of their unnecessary use.

scholarly journals 195. Duration of Therapy for Streptococcal Bacteremia

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S205-S205
Author(s):  
John M Boulos ◽  
Valeria Fabre ◽  
Kate Dzintars ◽  
Kate Dzintars ◽  
George Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Hospital Readmission ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Short Course ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Long Course

Abstract Background Shorter durations have shown similar clinical outcomes as longer durations for uncomplicated (source-controlled) Gram-negative bloodstream infections (BSI). There is limited data on the outcomes of patients with non-pneumococcal streptococcal BSI receiving shorter durations of therapy compared to usual durations. Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter study of adults hospitalized between January 2018 and March 2019 with ≥ 1 blood culture positive for Streptococcus spp. Exposed patients were those who received ≤ 10 days of antibiotics (i.e., short course therapy) and unexposed patients were those who received 11-21 days of antibiotics (i.e., prolonged course therapy). Patients were excluded if they had S. pneumoniae BSI, suspected contamination, did not receive or complete therapy, or treated for > 21 days. The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent bacteremia with the same pathogen, hospital readmission, or all-cause mortality, all within 30 days from completing therapy. The odds of achieving the primary outcome was compared between exposed and unexposed patients using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 176 patients met eligibility criteria. 35 (20%) received a short course (median 8 days) and 141 (80%) received a prolonged course (median 15 days) of antibiotic therapy. Baseline characteristics were similar between short and long course groups. The most common pathogens were viridans group streptococci (22%) and S. agalactiae (23%). The most common BSI source was skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) (40%). The primary outcome occurred in 26% (9/35) and 23% (33/141) of patients in the short course and prolonged course groups, respectively (p = 0.774). The proportion of patients in the short course and prolonged course groups who experienced recurrent BSI, hospital readmission, or all-cause mortality were also non-significant. After adjusting for receipt of an infectious diseases consult, Pitt bacteremia score, and SSTI source, the adjusted odds of meeting the composite outcome remained unchanged (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 0.55 – 3.61, p = 0.466). Table 1. Cohort Characteristics Table 2. Source/Microbiology Table 3. Outcomes Conclusion Approximately a week of antibiotic therapy may be associated with similar clinical outcomes as longer antibiotics courses in patients with uncomplicated streptococcal BSI. Disclosures Kate Dzintars, PharmD, Nothing to disclose Sara E. Cosgrove, MD, MS, Basilea (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant Pranita Tamma, MD, MHS, Nothing to disclose

scholarly journals Increased patency with comparable mortality and revascularization risk: Is the case for no-touch vein harvesting open and shut?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Makoto Hibino ◽  
Nitish Dhingra ◽  
Subodh Verma
Keyword(s):  
Graft Failure ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Wound Complications ◽  
Graft Occlusion ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Vein Harvesting

Since the introduction of the saphenous vein graft (SVG) for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in 19621, the SVG has remained the most commonly used conduit to the non-LAD territories for more than half a century. However, several issues surrounding the use of SVGs, including higher graft occlusion rates and wound complications from the harvesting process, have been identified in clinical practice. As such, significant interest has been dedicated towards developing harvesting techniques that minimize the risk of these acute and late complications. In this issue of the Journal of Cardiac Surgery, Yokoyama and colleagues compared the impact of open vein harvesting (OVH), endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) and no-touch vein harvesting (NT) on all-cause mortality, revascularization and graft failure, using a network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies. The results showed that the risk of graft failure was approximately halved amongst patients receiving NT compared with EVH and OVH; importantly, though, NT was not associated with lower all-cause mortality or revascularization risk. To further examine whether the use of NT grafts endow patients with better long-term clinical outcomes, such as mortality, myocardial infarction, and revascularization rates, a large-scaled randomized controlled trial or a patient-level combined meta-analysis is required.

P182 Implantable cardioverter defibrillator in old age patients with cardiomyopathy : a meta-analysis and systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Tokavanich ◽  
N Prasitlumkum ◽  
V Kittipibul ◽  
W Mongkonsritragoon ◽  
A Ariyachaipanich
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Ischemic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Performance Bias

Abstract Introduction Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (AICD) showed benefit for primary prevention of death in cardiomyopathy, but still controversy in elderly. We performed a systematic review and meta analysis to the benefit of AICD for primary prevention of death in patients age ≥ 65 with cardiomyopathy according to 2017 ACC/AHA guideline for the Management Ventricular Arrhythmias and 2015 ESC guideline for Management of Ventricular Arrythmias. Method We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS from inception to October 2018. Included studies with prospective and retrospective cohort design. Studies those compared all-cause mortality in elderly patients who has been implanted with AICD versus none. Data of each studies were combined with random effects model, subgroup analysis for each types of studies were done. All the results were reported in hazard ration (HR) and 95% confidence intervals. Result Nine studies from March 2002 to October 2018 were included in meta-analysis (Five randomized controlled trial and Four cohort studies) involving 20,656  patients. AICD implantation showed benefit in reduction of all-cause mortality in patients older than 65 years.( pooled hazard ratio =  0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.64 – 0.81, I2 = 56.3%),however pool hazard ratio from subgroup analysis with only randomized controlled trial did not demonstrate effectiveness of this intervention. (pooled hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.61 – 1, I2= 49.5%) Conclusion  AICD could benefit in reduction of all-cause mortality in aged patients. However randomized controlled trial with larger population in this group is needed. Clinical characteristics of studies Author Year Study type Total population Age of participant (year) Type of cardiomyopathy NYHA FC Median follow up ( months) Outcome definition Quality assessment Bias for RCT Mezu 2011 Prospective cohort 485 ≥ 80 Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy II - III 12 All-cause mortality Newcastle - ottawa : Fair Kober (DANISH) 2016 Randomize controlled trial 393 ≥ 68 Non ischemic cardiomyopathy II - III 67.6 All-cause mortality Performance bias Chan 2009 Prospective cohort 852 ≥ 65 Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy N/A 34 ± 16 All-cause mortality Newcastle - ottawa : Fair Kadish (DEFINITE) 2004 Randomize controlled trial 157 ≥ 65 Non ischemic cardiomyopathy I - III 29 ± 14.4 All-cause mortality Performance bias Bristow (COMPANION) 2004 Randomize controlled trial 853 ≥ 65 Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy III - IV 16.5 All-cause mortality Performance bias Moss ( MADIT II) 2002 Randomize controlled trial 436 ≥ 70 Ischemic cardiomyopathy I - III 20 All-cause mortality Performance bias Groeneveld 2008 Prospective cohort 14250 ≥ 65 Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy I - IV 24 All-cause mortality Newcastle - ottawa : Fair Bardy ( SCD HEFT) 2005 Randomize controlled trial 578 ≥ 65 Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy II - III 45.5 All-cause mortality Performance bias Pokorney 2015 Retrospective cohort 852 ≥ 65 Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy IV 36 All-cause mortality Newcastle - ottawa : Fair Abstract P182 Figure. Forest plot of elderly with AICD vs none

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document