-
Lancet (London, England) Feb 2022Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a major threat to human health around the world. Previous publications have estimated the effect of AMR on incidence, deaths,...
BACKGROUND
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a major threat to human health around the world. Previous publications have estimated the effect of AMR on incidence, deaths, hospital length of stay, and health-care costs for specific pathogen-drug combinations in select locations. To our knowledge, this study presents the most comprehensive estimates of AMR burden to date.
METHODS
We estimated deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) attributable to and associated with bacterial AMR for 23 pathogens and 88 pathogen-drug combinations in 204 countries and territories in 2019. We obtained data from systematic literature reviews, hospital systems, surveillance systems, and other sources, covering 471 million individual records or isolates and 7585 study-location-years. We used predictive statistical modelling to produce estimates of AMR burden for all locations, including for locations with no data. Our approach can be divided into five broad components: number of deaths where infection played a role, proportion of infectious deaths attributable to a given infectious syndrome, proportion of infectious syndrome deaths attributable to a given pathogen, the percentage of a given pathogen resistant to an antibiotic of interest, and the excess risk of death or duration of an infection associated with this resistance. Using these components, we estimated disease burden based on two counterfactuals: deaths attributable to AMR (based on an alternative scenario in which all drug-resistant infections were replaced by drug-susceptible infections), and deaths associated with AMR (based on an alternative scenario in which all drug-resistant infections were replaced by no infection). We generated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for final estimates as the 25th and 975th ordered values across 1000 posterior draws, and models were cross-validated for out-of-sample predictive validity. We present final estimates aggregated to the global and regional level.
FINDINGS
On the basis of our predictive statistical models, there were an estimated 4·95 million (3·62-6·57) deaths associated with bacterial AMR in 2019, including 1·27 million (95% UI 0·911-1·71) deaths attributable to bacterial AMR. At the regional level, we estimated the all-age death rate attributable to resistance to be highest in western sub-Saharan Africa, at 27·3 deaths per 100 000 (20·9-35·3), and lowest in Australasia, at 6·5 deaths (4·3-9·4) per 100 000. Lower respiratory infections accounted for more than 1·5 million deaths associated with resistance in 2019, making it the most burdensome infectious syndrome. The six leading pathogens for deaths associated with resistance (Escherichia coli, followed by Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) were responsible for 929 000 (660 000-1 270 000) deaths attributable to AMR and 3·57 million (2·62-4·78) deaths associated with AMR in 2019. One pathogen-drug combination, meticillin-resistant S aureus, caused more than 100 000 deaths attributable to AMR in 2019, while six more each caused 50 000-100 000 deaths: multidrug-resistant excluding extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E coli, carbapenem-resistant A baumannii, fluoroquinolone-resistant E coli, carbapenem-resistant K pneumoniae, and third-generation cephalosporin-resistant K pneumoniae.
INTERPRETATION
To our knowledge, this study provides the first comprehensive assessment of the global burden of AMR, as well as an evaluation of the availability of data. AMR is a leading cause of death around the world, with the highest burdens in low-resource settings. Understanding the burden of AMR and the leading pathogen-drug combinations contributing to it is crucial to making informed and location-specific policy decisions, particularly about infection prevention and control programmes, access to essential antibiotics, and research and development of new vaccines and antibiotics. There are serious data gaps in many low-income settings, emphasising the need to expand microbiology laboratory capacity and data collection systems to improve our understanding of this important human health threat.
FUNDING
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, and Department of Health and Social Care using UK aid funding managed by the Fleming Fund.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacterial Infections; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Global Burden of Disease; Global Health; Humans; Models, Statistical
PubMed: 35065702
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02724-0 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Apr 2022These ESCMID guidelines address the targeted antibiotic treatment of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales (3GCephRE) and carbapenem-resistant...
European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) guidelines for the treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (endorsed by European society of intensive care medicine).
SCOPE
These ESCMID guidelines address the targeted antibiotic treatment of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales (3GCephRE) and carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, focusing on the effectiveness of individual antibiotics and on combination versus monotherapy.
METHODS
An expert panel was convened by ESCMID. A systematic review was performed including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, examining different antibiotic treatment regimens for the targeted treatment of infections caused by the 3GCephRE, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. Treatments were classified as head-to-head comparisons between individual antibiotics and between monotherapy and combination therapy regimens, including defined monotherapy and combination regimens only. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, preferably at 30 days and secondary outcomes included clinical failure, microbiological failure, development of resistance, relapse/recurrence, adverse events and length of hospital stay. The last search of all databases was conducted in December 2019, followed by a focused search for relevant studies up until ECCMID 2021. Data were summarized narratively. The certainty of the evidence for each comparison between antibiotics and between monotherapy and combination therapy regimens was classified by the GRADE recommendations. The strength of the recommendations for or against treatments was classified as strong or conditional (weak).
RECOMMENDATIONS
The guideline panel reviewed the evidence per pathogen, preferably per site of infection, critically appraising the existing studies. Many of the comparisons were addressed in small observational studies at high risk of bias only. Notably, there was very little evidence on the effects of the new, recently approved, β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors on infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Most recommendations are based on very-low- and low-certainty evidence. A high value was placed on antibiotic stewardship considerations in all recommendations, searching for carbapenem-sparing options for 3GCephRE and limiting the recommendations of the new antibiotics for severe infections, as defined by the sepsis-3 criteria. Research needs are addressed.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Carbapenems; Communicable Diseases; Critical Care; Gram-Negative Bacteria; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections; Humans
PubMed: 34923128
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.11.025 -
International Journal of Environmental... Sep 2022One of the public health issues faced worldwide is antibiotic resistance (AR). During the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, AR has increased. Since some studies... (Review)
Review
One of the public health issues faced worldwide is antibiotic resistance (AR). During the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, AR has increased. Since some studies have stated AR has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, and others have stated otherwise, this study aimed to explore this impact. Seven databases-PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and CINAHL-were searched using related keywords to identify studies relevant to AR during COVID-19 published from December 2019 to May 2022, according to PRISMA guidelines. Twenty-three studies were included in this review, and the evidence showed that AR has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most commonly reported resistant Gram-negative bacteria was , followed by , , and . and were highly resistant to tested antibiotics compared with and . Moreover, showed high resistance to colistin. Commonly reported Gram-positive bacteria were and . The resistance of to ampicillin, erythromycin, and Ciprofloxacin was high. Self-antibiotic medication, empirical antibiotic administration, and antibiotics prescribed by general practitioners were the risk factors of high levels of AR during COVID-19. Antibiotics' prescription should be strictly implemented, relying on the Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (ASP) and guidelines from the World Health Organization (WHO) or Ministry of Health (MOH).
Topics: Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Ciprofloxacin; Colistin; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Erythromycin; Escherichia coli; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Pandemics; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 36231256
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191911931 -
BMJ Open Aug 2021To evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
DATA SOURCES
We performed a literature search of the electronic databases CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE (Ovid) and Web of Science from database inception to May 2021 as well as hand searching of trial registries and reference lists of related reviews.
STUDY SELECTION
Two reviewers identified whether RCTs met the following inclusion criteria: adult population to whom antibiotics were administered; a probiotic intervention; a placebo, alternative dose, alternative probiotic strain or no treatment control; and incidence of AAD as the outcome.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently collected data and assessed risk of bias using preconstructed data extraction forms. We used a random effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate species-specific and dose-specific response.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies (11,305 participants) were included in this review. The pooled analysis suggests that co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics reduces the risk of AAD in adults by 37% (risk ratio (RR)=0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), p<0.00001). The overall quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria was found to be moderate. In subgroup analyses, high dose compared with low dose of the same probiotic demonstrated a positive protective effect (RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.76), p<0.01), and only certain species, mainly of the lactobacillus and bifidobacteria genera, were found to be effective. Studies with a low baseline AAD risk did not show any difference in risk but studies with moderate or high baseline AAD risk demonstrated a significant risk reduction.
CONCLUSIONS
Probiotics are effective for preventing AAD. Secondary analyses of higher dosages and certain species have shown increased effectiveness. Our results may not be applicable in clinical scenarios of lower baseline AAD risk.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Diarrhea; Humans; Incidence; Lactobacillus; Probiotics
PubMed: 34385227
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043054 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Dec 2018The use of antibiotic prophylaxis in extraction and implant dentistry is still controversial, with varying opinions regarding their necessity. The overuse of... (Review)
Review
The use of antibiotic prophylaxis in extraction and implant dentistry is still controversial, with varying opinions regarding their necessity. The overuse of antibiotics has led to widespread antimicrobial resistance and the emergence of multi drug resistant strains of bacteria. The main aim of this work was to determine whether there is a genuine need for antibiotic prophylaxis in two common dental procedures; dental implants and tooth extractions. Electronic searches were conducted across databases such as Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the UK National Health Service, Centre for reviews, Science Direct, PubMed and the British Dental Journal to identify clinical trials of either dental implants or tooth extractions, whereby the independent variable was systemic prophylactic antibiotics used as part of treatment in order to prevent postoperative complications such as implant failure or infection. Primary outcomes of interest were implant failure, and postoperative infections which include systemic bacteraemia and localised infections. The secondary outcome of interest was adverse events due to antibiotics. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool was used to assess the risk of bias, extract outcomes of interest and to identify studies for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Seven randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were included in the final review comprising = 1368 patients requiring either tooth extraction(s) or dental implant(s). No statistically significant evidence was found to support the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in reducing the risk of implant failure ( = 0.09, RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.16⁻1.14) or post-operative complications ( = 0.47, RR: 0.74; 95% CI 0.34⁻1.65) under normal conditions. Approximately 33 patients undergoing dental implant surgery need to receive antibiotics in order to prevent one implant failure from occurring. There is little conclusive evidence to suggest the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis for third molar extractive surgery in healthy young adults. There was no statistical evidence for adverse events experienced for antibiotics vs. placebo. Based on our analysis, even if financially feasible, clinicians must carefully consider the appropriate use of antibiotics in dental implants and extraction procedures due to the risk of allergic reactions and the development of microbial drug resistance.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Databases, Factual; Dental Implants; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Endocarditis; Female; Humans; Hypersensitivity; Male; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection; Tooth Extraction; Young Adult
PubMed: 30513764
DOI: 10.3390/medicina54060095 -
European Review For Medical and... Apr 2019Chronic osteomyelitis is a difficult to treat infection of the bone, which requires a combined medical and surgical approach and often persists intermittently for years,...
Chronic osteomyelitis is a difficult to treat infection of the bone, which requires a combined medical and surgical approach and often persists intermittently for years, with relapses and failures. The optimal type, route of administration, and duration of antibiotic treatment remain controversial, and the emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms poses major therapeutic challenges. Identification of the causative agent and subsequent targeted antibiotic treatment has a major impact on patients' outcome. In this review, we summarize which intravenous and oral antibiotics are the best options available for the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis, according to specific aetiologies.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chronic Disease; Humans; Osteomyelitis
PubMed: 30977893
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_201904_17500 -
Journal of Thoracic Oncology : Official... Jul 2020Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically improved patient outcomes in a variety of tumor types, but with variable efficacy. Recent research has suggested... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically improved patient outcomes in a variety of tumor types, but with variable efficacy. Recent research has suggested that antibiotic-induced disruption of the microbiota may impact ICI efficacy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that assessed the impact of antibiotic use on the survival of patients diagnosed with NSCLC and treated with ICI. We systematically searched Medline, the Cochrane Library, and major oncology conferences proceedings. Eligible studies mentioned hazard ratio or Kaplan-Meier curves for progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) based on antibiotic exposure before or during ICI treatment. We identified 23 eligible studies. The impact of antibiotics was then evaluated in 2208 patients for PFS and 5560 for OS. For both PFS and OS meta-analyses, the between-study heterogeneity was high (Higgins and Thompson I of 69% and 80%, respectively). The pooled hazard ratio was 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-1.90) for PFS and 1.69 (95% CI: 1.25-2.29) for OS revealing a significantly reduced survival in patients with NSCLC exposed to antibiotics. The median OS was reduced on average by 6.7 months (95% CI: 5.1-8.4) in the patients exposed to antibiotics. The effect seems to depend on the time window of exposure with stronger effects reported when the patients took antibiotics [-60 days; +60 days] around ICI initiation. In patients with NSCLC, the findings of the meta-analysis indicate that antibiotic use before or during treatment with ICI leads to a median OS decreased by more than 6 months. Specifically, exposure shortly before or after ICI initiation seems to be particularly detrimental, whereas antibiotic use later during disease course does not seem to alter survival. Because PFS and OS were difficult to compare between studies owing to heterogeneity and the multiple confounding factors identified, further studies are needed to strengthen the understanding of this phenomenon.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Humans; Immunotherapy; Lung Neoplasms; Proportional Hazards Models
PubMed: 32173463
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.03.002 -
Heart (British Cardiac Society) Jun 2017The use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) for prevention of infective endocarditis (IE) is controversial. In recent years, guidelines to cardiologists and dentists have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) for prevention of infective endocarditis (IE) is controversial. In recent years, guidelines to cardiologists and dentists have advised restriction of AP to high-risk groups (in Europe and the USA) or against its use at all (in the UK). The objective of this systematic review was to appraise the evidence for use of AP for prevention of bacteraemia or IE in patients undergoing dental procedures.
METHODS
We conducted electronic searches in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Science. We assessed the methodological characteristics of included studies using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology criteria for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for trials. Two reviewers independently determined the eligibility of studies, assessed the methodology of included studies and extracted the data.
RESULTS
We identified 178 eligible studies, of which 36 were included in the review. This included 10 time-trend studies, 5 observational studies and 21 trials. All trials identified used bacteraemia as an endpoint rather than IE. One time-trend study suggests that total AP restriction may be associated with a rising incidence of IE, while data on the consequences of relative AP restriction are conflicting. Meta-analysis of trials indicates that AP is effective in reducing the incidence of bacteraemia (risk ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.57, p<0.01), but case-control studies suggest this may not translate to a statistically significant protective effect against IE in patients at low risk of disease.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence base for the use of AP is limited, heterogeneous and the methodological quality of many studies is poor. Postprocedural bacteraemia is not a good surrogate endpoint for IE. Given the logistical challenges of a randomised trial, high-quality case-control studies would help to evaluate the role of dental procedures in causing IE and the efficacy of AP in its prevention.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Endocarditis; Humans
PubMed: 28213367
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2015-309102 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Diverticulitis is a complication of the common condition, diverticulosis. Uncomplicated diverticulitis has traditionally been treated with antibiotics, as diverticulitis... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Diverticulitis is a complication of the common condition, diverticulosis. Uncomplicated diverticulitis has traditionally been treated with antibiotics, as diverticulitis has been regarded as an infectious disease. Risk factors for diverticulitis, however, may suggest that the condition is inflammatory rather than infectious which makes the use of antibiotics questionable.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this systematic review were to determine if antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis affects the risk of complications (immediate or late) or the need for emergency surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, a comprehensive systematic literature search was conducted in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform on February 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including all types of patients with a radiologically confirmed diagnosis of left-sided uncomplicated acute diverticulitis. Comparator and interventions included antibiotics compared to no antibiotics, placebo, or to any other antibiotic treatment (different regimens, routes of administration, dosage or duration of treatment). Primary outcome measures were complications and emergency surgery. Secondary outcomes were recurrence, late complications, elective colonic resections, length of hospital stay, length to recovery of symptoms, adverse events and mortality.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors performed the searches, identification and assessment of RCTs and data extraction. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or involvement of the third author. Authors of trials were contacted to obtain additional data if needed or for preliminary results of ongoing trials. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to assess the methodological quality of the identified trials. The overall quality of evidence for outcomes was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Effect estimates were extracted as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed with the Mantel-Haenzel method.
MAIN RESULTS
The authors included five studies. Three studies compared no antibiotics to antibiotics; all three were original RCTs of which two also published long-term follow-up information. For the outcome of short-term complications there may be little or no difference between antibiotics and no antibiotics (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.30 to 2.62; 3 studies, 1329 participants; low-certainty evidence). The rate of emergency surgery within 30 days may be lower with no antibiotics compared to antibiotics (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.13, 1.71; 1329 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). However, there is considerable imprecision due to wide confidence intervals for this effect estimate causing uncertainty which means that there may also be a benefit with antibiotics. One of the two remaining trials compared single to double compound antibiotic therapy and, due to wide confidence intervals, the estimate was imprecise and indicated an uncertain clinical effect between these two antibiotic regimens (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.11 to 4.58; 51 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). The last trial compared short to long intravenous administration of antibiotics and did not report any events for our primary outcomes. Both trials included few participants and one had overall high risk of bias. Since the first publication of this systematic review, an increasing amount of evidence supporting the treatment of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis without antibiotics has been published, but the total body of evidence is still limited.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence on antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute diverticulitis suggests that the effect of antibiotics is uncertain for complications, emergency surgery, recurrence, elective colonic resections, and long-term complications. The quality of the evidence is low. Only three RCTs on the need for antibiotics are currently available. More trials are needed to obtain more precise effect estimates.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Colon; Diverticulitis; Humans; Length of Stay
PubMed: 35731704
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009092.pub3 -
JAMA Dermatology Apr 2023Antibiotics are an important risk for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN), which are the most severe types of drug hypersensitivity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Antibiotics are an important risk for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN), which are the most severe types of drug hypersensitivity reaction with a mortality rate up to 50%. To our knowledge, no global systematic review has described antibiotic-associated SJS/TEN.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the prevalence of antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN worldwide.
DATA SOURCES
The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for experimental and observational studies that described SJS/TEN risks since database inception to February 22, 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Included studies adequately described SJS/TEN origins and specified the antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers (E.Y.L. and C.K.) independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed in the studies that described patient-level associations. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the heterogeneity. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist, and the certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prevalence of antibiotic-associated SJS/TEN was presented as pooled proportions with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
Among the 64 studies included in the systematic review, there were 38 studies that described patient-level associations; the meta-analysis included these 38 studies with 2917 patients to determine the prevalence of single antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN. The pooled proportion of antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN was 28% (95% CI, 24%-33%), with moderate certainty of evidence. Among antibiotic-associated SJS/TEN, the sulfonamide class was associated with 32% (95% CI, 22%-44%) of cases, followed by penicillins (22%; 95% CI, 17%-28%), cephalosporins (11%; 95% CI, 6%-17%), fluoroquinolones (4%; 95% CI, 1%-7%), and macrolides (2%; 95% CI, 1%-5%). There was a statistically significant heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, which could be partially explained in the subgroup analysis by continents. The overall risk of bias was low using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case series.
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of all case series, antibiotics were associated with more than one-quarter of SJS/TEN cases described worldwide, and sulfonamide antibiotics remained the most important association. These findings highlight the importance of antibiotic stewardship, clinician education and awareness, and weighing the risk-benefit assessment of antibiotic choice and duration.
Topics: Humans; Stevens-Johnson Syndrome; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Prevalence; Sulfanilamide; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36790777
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.6378