-
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy Feb 2023The objective of this systematic review is to summarize in vitro, preclinical, and human data related to omadacycline and infection (CDI). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this systematic review is to summarize in vitro, preclinical, and human data related to omadacycline and infection (CDI).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for "omadacycline" AND ("" OR "" OR "") for any studies published before February 15, 2022. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Events Reporting System (AERS) was searched for omadacycline (for reports including "" or "CDI" or "gastrointestinal infection"). The publications list publicly available at Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Web site was reviewed.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Publications presenting primary data on omadacycline and published in English were included.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Preclinical and clinical evidence was extracted from 14 studies. No case reports in indexed literature and no reports on FDA AERS were found. Omadacycline has potent in vitro activity against many clinical strains and diverse ribotypes. In phase 3 studies, there were no reports of CDI in patients who received omadacycline for either community-acquired bacterial pneumonia or acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection.
RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
Omadacycline should be considered a low-risk antibiotic regarding its propensity to cause CDI.
CONCLUSIONS
Reducing the burden of CDI on patients and the health care system should be a priority. Patients with appropriate indications who are at heightened risk of CDI may be suitable candidates for omadacycline therapy. In these patients, omadacycline may be preferable to antibiotics with a high CDI risk.
Topics: Humans; Clostridioides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clostridium Infections; Clostridioides difficile; Bacteria; Community-Acquired Infections
PubMed: 35656828
DOI: 10.1177/10600280221089007 -
BioMed Research International 2017Knowledge about the elution from antibiotic-loaded cement spacers is an indispensable premise for guarantee of clinical success. A systematic literature search was... (Review)
Review
Knowledge about the elution from antibiotic-loaded cement spacers is an indispensable premise for guarantee of clinical success. A systematic literature search was performed through PubMed. Search terms were "antibiotic elution" and "antibiotic release" in combination with "spacer," "hip spacer," and "knee spacer," respectively. A total of 11 studies could be identified. Seven studies reported on the release of antibiotics after spacer implantation, three studies at spacer removal, and one study on both time points. Seven studies reported on hip spacers, one study on knee spacers, and three studies on both. In eight studies, custom-made spacers have been implanted and in three prefabricated ones. In the majority of the studies, the cement has been loaded with an antibiotic combination, mostly consisting of aminoglycoside (either gentamicin or tobramycin) and vancomycin. Measured concentrations exceeded the minimal inhibitory concentration of the particular pathogen organisms in each case. However, large discrepancies were observed with regard to the height of the antibiotic concentration depending on the antibiotic combination and the antibiotic ratio used. Current literature data indicate a sufficient elution of antibiotics after spacer implantation and at spacer removal, respectively. Future studies are required to optimize the local antibiotic therapy at the site of spacer implantation.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Bone Cements; Gentamicins; Humans; Knee Joint; Knee Prosthesis; Polymethyl Methacrylate; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Tobramycin; Vancomycin
PubMed: 28656144
DOI: 10.1155/2017/4657874 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2014Pyelonephritis is usually caused by ascent of bacteria (most often Escherichia coli) from the bladder, and is more likely in people with structural or functional urinary... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Pyelonephritis is usually caused by ascent of bacteria (most often Escherichia coli) from the bladder, and is more likely in people with structural or functional urinary tract abnormalities. The prognosis is good if pyelonephritis is treated appropriately, but complications include renal abscess, renal impairment, and septic shock.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of antibiotic treatments for acute pyelonephritis in non-pregnant women with uncomplicated infection? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to November 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found four studies that met our inclusion criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (intravenous), antibiotics (oral), and antibiotics (switch therapy).
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Female; Humans; Pyelonephritis
PubMed: 25373019
DOI: No ID Found -
PloS One 2018In orthognathic surgery, antibiotics are prescribed to reduce the risk of postoperative infection. However, there is lack of consensus over the appropriate drug, the... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
In orthognathic surgery, antibiotics are prescribed to reduce the risk of postoperative infection. However, there is lack of consensus over the appropriate drug, the dose and duration of administration. The aim of this complex systematic review was to assess the effect of antibiotics on postoperative infections in orthognathic surgery.
METHODS
Both systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed. Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley) and EMBASE (embase.com), PubMed (non-indexed articles) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publications were searched. The primary studies were assessed using GRADE and the systematic reviews by AMSTAR.
RESULTS
Screening of abstracts yielded 6 systematic reviews and 36 primary studies warranting full text scrutiny. In total,14 primary studies were assessed for risk of bias. Assessment of the included systematic reviews identified two studies with a moderate risk of bias, due to inclusion in the meta-analyses of primary studies with a high risk of bias. Quality assessment of the primary studies disclosed one with a moderate risk of bias and one with a low risk. The former compared a single dose of antibiotic with 24 hour prophylaxis using the same antibiotic; the latter compared oral and intravenous administration of antibiotics. Given the limited number of acceptable studies, no statistical analysis was undertaken, as it was unlikely to contribute any relevant information.
CONCLUSION
With respect to antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery, most of the studies to date have been poorly conducted and reported. Thus scientific uncertainty remains as to the preferred antibiotic and the optimal duration of administration.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Humans; Orthognathic Surgical Procedures; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 29385159
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191161 -
European Urology Focus Jul 2023Patients undergoing radical cystectomy frequently suffer from infectious complications, including urinary tract infections (UTIs) and surgical site infections (SSIs)... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Patients undergoing radical cystectomy frequently suffer from infectious complications, including urinary tract infections (UTIs) and surgical site infections (SSIs) leading to emergency department visits, hospital readmission, and added cost.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the literature regarding perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, ureteric stent usage, and prevalence of infectious complications after cystectomy.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic review of PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and reference lists was conducted.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We identified 20 reports including a total of 55Â 306 patients. The median rates of any infection, UTIs, SSIs, and bacteremia were 40%, 20%, 11%, and 6%, respectively. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis differed substantially between reports. Perioperative antibiotics were used only during surgery in one study but were continued over several days after surgery in all other studies. Empirical use of antibiotics for 1-3 d after surgery was described in 12 studies, 3-10 d in two studies, and >10 d in four studies. Time to stent removal ranged from 4 to 25 d after cystectomy. Prophylactic antibiotics were used before stent removal in nine of 20 studies; two of these studies used targeted antibiotics based on urine cultures from the ureteric stents, and the other seven studies used a single shot or 2 d of empirical antibiotics. Studies with any prophylactic antibiotic before stent removal found a lower median percentage of positive blood cultures after stent removal than studies without prophylactic antibiotics before stent removal (2% vs 9%).
CONCLUSIONS
We confirmed a high proportion of infectious complications after cystectomy, and a heterogeneous pattern of choice and duration of antibiotics during and after surgery or stent removal. These findings highlight a need for further studies and support quality prospective trials.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this review, we observed wide variability in the use of antibiotics before or after surgical removal of the bladder.
Topics: Humans; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Cystectomy; Prospective Studies; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Surgical Wound Infection; Urinary Tract Infections; Stents
PubMed: 36710211
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.01.012 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2018Asthma is a chronic respiratory condition that affects over 300 million adults and children worldwide. It is characterised by wheeze, cough, chest tightness, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a chronic respiratory condition that affects over 300 million adults and children worldwide. It is characterised by wheeze, cough, chest tightness, and shortness of breath. Symptoms typically are intermittent and may worsen over a short time, leading to an exacerbation. Asthma exacerbations can be serious, leading to hospitalisation or even death in rare cases. Exacerbations may be treated by increasing an individual's usual medication and providing additional medication, such as oral steroids. Although antibiotics are sometimes included in the treatment regimen, bacterial infections are thought to be responsible for only a minority of exacerbations, and current guidance states that antibiotics should be reserved for cases in which clear signs, symptoms, or laboratory test results are suggestive of bacterial infection.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and safety of antibiotics in the treatment of asthma exacerbations.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which contains records compiled from multiple electronic and handsearched resources. We also searched trial registries and reference lists of primary studies. We conducted the most recent search in October 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies comparing antibiotic therapy for asthma exacerbations in adults or children versus placebo or usual care not involving an antibiotic. We allowed studies including any type of antibiotic, any dose, and any duration, providing the aim was to treat the exacerbation. We included parallel studies of any duration conducted in any setting and planned to include cluster trials. We excluded cross-over trials. We included studies reported as full-text articles, those published as abstracts only, and unpublished data.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors screened the search results for eligible studies. We extracted outcome data, assessed risk of bias in duplicate, and resolved discrepancies by involving another review author. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), all with a fixed-effect model. We described skewed data narratively. We graded the results and presented evidence in 'Summary of findings' tables for each comparison. Primary outcomes were intensive care unit/high dependence unit (ICU/HDU) admission, duration of symptoms/exacerbations, and all adverse events. Seconday outcomes were mortality, length of hospital admission, relapse after index presentation, and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR).
MAIN RESULTS
Six studies met our inclusion criteria and included a total of 681 adults and children with exacerbations of asthma. Mean age in the three studies in adults ranged from 36.2 to 41.2 years. The three studies in children applied varied inclusion criteria, ranging from one to 18 years of age. Five studies explicitly excluded participants with obvious signs and symptoms of bacterial infection (i.e. those clearly meeting current guidance to receive antibiotics). Four studies investigated macrolide antibiotics, and two studies investigated penicillin (amoxicillin and ampicillin) antibiotics; both studies using penicillin were conducted over 35 years ago. Five studies compared antibiotics versus placebo, and one was open-label. Study follow-up ranged from one to twelve weeks. Trials were of varied methodological quality, and we were able to perform only limited meta-analysis.None of the included trials reported ICU/HDU admission, although one participant in the placebo group of a study including children with status asthmaticus experienced a respiratory arrest and was ventilated. Four studies reported asthma symptoms, but we were able to combine results for only two macrolide studies of 416 participants; the MD in diary card symptom score was -0.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.60 to -0.08), with lower scores (on a 7 point scale) denoting improved symptoms. Two macrolide studies reported symptom-free days. One study of 255 adults authors reported the percentage of symptom-free days at 10 days as 16% in the antibiotic group and 8% in the placebo group. In a further study of 40 children study authors reported significantly more symptom-free days at all time points in the antibiotic group compared with the usual care group. The same study reported the duration in days of the index asthma exacerbation, again favouring the antibiotic group. One study of a penicillin including 69 participants reported asthma symptoms at hospital discharge; the between-group difference for both studies was reported as non-significant.We combined data for serious adverse events from three studies involving 502 participants, but events were rare; the three trials reported only 10 events: five in the antibiotic group and five in the placebo group. We combined data for all adverse events (AEs) from three studies, but the effect estimate is imprecise (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.43). No deaths were reported in any of the included studies.Two studies investigating penicillins reported admission duration; neither study reported a between-group difference. In one study (263 participants) of macrolides, two participants in each arm were reported as experiencing a relapse, defined as a further exacerbation, by the six-week time points. We combined PEFR endpoint results at 10 days for two macrolide studies; the result favoured antibiotics over placebo (MD 23.42 L/min, 95% CI 5.23 to 41.60). One study in children reported the maximum peak flow recorded during the follow-up period, favouring the clarithromycin group, but the confidence interval includes no difference (MD 38.80, 95% CI -11.19 to 88.79).Grading of outcomes ranged from moderate to very low quality, with quality of outcomes downgraded for suspicion of publication bias, indirectness, imprecision, and poor methodological quality of studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found limited evidence that antibiotics given at the time of an asthma exacerbation may improve symptoms and PEFR at follow-up compared with standard care or placebo. However, findings were inconsistent across the six heterogeneous studies included, two of the studies were conducted over 30 years ago and most of the participants included in this review were recruited from emergency departments, limiting the applicability of findings to this population. Therefore we have limited confidence in the results. We found insufficient evidence about several patient-important outcomes (e.g. hospital admission) to form conclusions. We were unable to rule out a difference between groups in terms of all adverse events, but serious adverse events were rare.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Age Factors; Amoxicillin; Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Asthma; Child; Disease Progression; Humans; Length of Stay; Macrolides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29938789
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002741.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common bacterial pathogen causing lung infections in people with cystic fibrosis and appropriate antibiotic therapy is vital.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common bacterial pathogen causing lung infections in people with cystic fibrosis and appropriate antibiotic therapy is vital. Antibiotics for pulmonary exacerbations are usually given intravenously, and for long-term treatment, via a nebuliser. Oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics with the same efficacy and safety as intravenous or nebulised antibiotics would benefit people with cystic fibrosis due to ease of treatment and avoidance of hospitalisation. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefit or harm of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis, colonised with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, in the:1. treatment of a pulmonary exacerbation; and2. long-term treatment of chronic infection.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.We contacted pharmaceutical companies and checked reference lists of identified trials.Date of last search: 08 July 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any dose of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics, to other combinations of inhaled, oral or intravenous antibiotics, or to placebo or usual treatment for pulmonary exacerbations and long-term treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected the trials, extracted data and assessed quality. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three trials examining pulmonary exacerbations (171 participants) and two trials examining long-term therapy (85 participants). We regarded the most important outcomes as quality of life and lung function. The analysis did not identify any statistically significant difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments for these outcome measures for either pulmonary exacerbations or long-term treatment. One of the included trials reported significantly better lung function when treating a pulmonary exacerbation with ciprofloxacin when compared with intravenous treatment; however, our analysis did not confirm this finding. We found no evidence of difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments regarding adverse events or development of antibiotic resistance, but trials were not adequately powered to detect this. None of the studies had a low risk of bias from blinding which may have an impact particularly on subjective outcomes such as quality of life. The risk of bias for other criteria could not be clearly stated across the studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no conclusive evidence that an oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotic regimen is more or less effective than an alternative treatment for either pulmonary exacerbations or long-term treatment of chronic infection with P. aeruginosa. Until results of adequately-powered future trials are available, treatment needs to be selected on a pragmatic basis, based upon any available non-randomised evidence, the clinical circumstances of the individual, the known effectiveness of drugs against local strains and upon individual preference.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Chronic Disease; Cystic Fibrosis; Humans; Pseudomonas Infections; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Tract Infections; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27412131
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005405.pub4 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Jun 2016Antibiotic consumption is an easily quantifiable performance measure in hospitals and might be used for monitoring. We conducted a review of published studies and online... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Antibiotic consumption is an easily quantifiable performance measure in hospitals and might be used for monitoring. We conducted a review of published studies and online surveillance reports reporting on antibiotic consumption in acute care hospitals between the years 1997 and 2013. A pooled estimate of antibiotic consumption was calculated using a random effects meta-analysis of rates with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed through subgroup analysis and metaregression. Eighty studies, comprising data from 3130 hospitals, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of hospital-wide consumption was 586 (95% confidence interval 540 to 632) defined daily doses (DDD)/1000 hospital days (HD) for all antibacterials. However, consumption rates were highly heterogeneous. Antibacterial consumption was highest in intensive care units, at 1563 DDD/1000 HD (95% confidence interval 1472 to 1653). Hospital-wide antibacterial consumption was higher in Western Europe and in medium-sized, private and university-affiliated hospitals. The methods of data collection were significantly associated with consumption rates, including data sources, dispensing vs. purchase vs. usage data, counting admission and discharge days and inclusion of low-consumption departments. Heterogeneity remained in all subgroup analyses. Major heterogeneity currently precludes defining acceptable antibiotic consumption ranges in acute care hospitals. Guidelines on antibiotic consumption reporting that will account for case mix and a minimal set of hospital characteristics recommending standardized methods for monitoring and reporting are needed.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Critical Care; Drug Utilization; Europe; Hospitals; Humans; Research Design
PubMed: 26899826
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2016.01.026 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Feb 2023: Anecdotal evidence suggested variation in practices for antibiotic prescribing around dental procedures including route of administration of antibiotics, timing of the...
: Anecdotal evidence suggested variation in practices for antibiotic prescribing around dental procedures including route of administration of antibiotics, timing of the course prescribed (before, after or both), length of course prescribed, narrow vs. broad spectrum agents prescribed, use of single or combination of antibiotics, and the use of loading doses. This review aims to investigate this disparity of practices and the absence of global and local recent consensus on the most appropriate antibiotic interventions around invasive dental procedures. : Following PRISMA-P methodology, a systematic review of randomised controlled clinical trials was designed, reviewed, and entered on the PROSPERO website prior to commencement. Ethics approval was gained from the University of Wolverhampton Committee. Searches were performed using PubMed, Science Directâ„¢, and the Cochrane Database, plus the bibliographies of studies identified. They investigated studies examining the efficacy and safety of any antibiotic regimen tested, independent of regimen used, versus a placebo, control, or no therapy, on outcomes in post third molar extraction. : The primary outcome of interest was postoperative infection and secondary outcomes were other post-surgical related complications of infectious nature and antibiotic adverse events. Sixteen RCTs were identified that met the selection criteria. Antibiotic use was reported to be safe, causing few adverse events. Meta-analysis of infection events showed antibiotics reduced the risk of an infection by 69%, but routine use for prophylaxis in uncomplicated procedures was not supported, and their role in patients with comorbidities or impaired immunity remains controversial. The effect on the incidence of dry socket showed no difference based upon regimen used. No significant benefit was found with respect to reduction of intraoral inflammation, wound dehiscence, haematoma, and lymphadenopathy. : The effect on postoperative pain reduction was inconclusive. Routine use of antibiotics around M3 extraction procedures is not supported, but their use in the presence of co-morbidities and or immunosuppression remains controversial to be confirmed by future studies.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Molar, Third; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 36984426
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59030422 -
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Jan 2015Nowadays, the development of antibiotic resistance represents one of the most important issues of the global public health. The incorrect use of antimicrobial drugs is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Nowadays, the development of antibiotic resistance represents one of the most important issues of the global public health. The incorrect use of antimicrobial drugs is recognized as one of the leading causes of antibiotic resistance. Therefore, a better understanding of the existing pieces of evidence pertaining knowledge and attitudes about antibiotic and antibiotic resistance in the general population worldwide is advisable.
METHODS
A systematic review and proportion meta-analyses were performed through PubMed and Scopus scientific databases. Cross-sectional studies published from January 2000 to November 2013 and investigating knowledge about antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance were included.
RESULTS
Overall, 26 studies have been selected for the systematic review, and 24 of these were included in the meta-analyses. A lack of knowledge about antibiotics was detected. In particular, 33.7% (95%CI 25.2-42.8) of the sample did not know that antibiotics can treat bacterial infections, and 53.9% (95%CI 41.6-66.0) of them did not know that antibiotics are not useful against viruses. Besides, although 59.4% (95%CI 45.7-72.4) of the sample was aware of antibiotic resistance, 26.9% (95%CI 16.6-38.7) of them did not know that misuse of antibiotics can lead to this problem. Finally, 47.1% (95%CI 36.1-58.2) of the subjects stop taking antibiotics when they start feeling better.
CONCLUSIONS
It would be necessary to strengthen educational initiatives in the community and to push physicians to correctly inform patients in order to make them aware of the importance of a correct behavior concerning antibiotic consumption.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Awareness; Cross-Sectional Studies; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Population Surveillance
PubMed: 25251203
DOI: 10.1002/pds.3716