-
Clinical Oral Implants Research Jul 2023Growing evidence is highlighting the inefficacy of clindamycin as an effective substitute to amoxicillin in patients self-reporting a penicillin allergy. The hypothesis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Self-reported allergy to penicillin and clindamycin administration may be risk factors for dental implant failure: A systematic review, meta-analysis and delabeling protocol.
OBJECTIVE
Growing evidence is highlighting the inefficacy of clindamycin as an effective substitute to amoxicillin in patients self-reporting a penicillin allergy. The hypothesis is that implant failure is higher in these patients, when compared to patients receiving penicillin. To test this hypothesis, a systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken and a protocol for delabeling penicillin allergic patients was presented.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review was undertaken by searching across three different databases, namely PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science.
RESULTS
Out of 572 results, four studies were eligible to be included. Fixed-effects meta-analysis showed a higher number of failed implants in patients who were administered clindamycin, because of a self-reported allergy to penicillin. Results showed that these patients are over three times more likely (OR = 3.30, 95% C.I. 2.58-4.22, p-value < .00001) to undergo implant failure with an average cumulative proportion of 11.0% (95% C.I. 3.5-22.0%) versus 3.8% (95% C.I. 1.2-7.7%) of patients not requiring clindamycin and administered amoxicillin. A protocol for penicillin allergy delabeling is proposed.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is still limited and based on retrospective observational studies, it is difficult to state if penicillin allergy, clindamycin administration or a combination of both is responsible for the current trends and reported findings.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clindamycin; Dental Implants; Drug Hypersensitivity; Hypersensitivity; Penicillins; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Self Report; Clinical Protocols
PubMed: 37102260
DOI: 10.1111/clr.14073 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2024Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in particular in travellers and high-risk groups. However, the clinical benefits are unknown, especially when considering possible treatment-associated adverse effects. This review assesses the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in leptospirosis and is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Library (2009, Issue 3).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotic prophylaxis for human leptospirosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and other resources. We searched online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The last date of search was 17 April 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised clinical trials of any trial design, assessing antibiotics for prevention of leptospirosis, and with no restrictions on age, sex, occupation, or comorbidity of trial participants. We looked for trials assessing antibiotics irrespective of route of administration, dosage, and schedule versus placebo or no intervention. We also included trials assessing antibiotics versus other antibiotics using these criteria, or the same antibiotic but with another dose or schedule.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed Cochrane methodology. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (inclusive of asymptomatic cases), clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation, clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (exclusive of asymptomatic cases), and serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were quality of life and the proportion of people with non-serious adverse events. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using the RoB 2 tool and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a random-effects model for our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. Our primary outcome analyses included trial data at the longest follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five randomised clinical trials comprising 2593 participants that compared antibiotics (doxycycline, azithromycin, or penicillin) with placebo, or one antibiotic compared with another. Four trials assessed doxycycline with different durations, one trial assessed azithromycin, and one trial assessed penicillin. One trial had three intervention groups: doxycycline, azithromycin, and placebo. Three trials assessed pre-exposure prophylaxis, one trial assessed postexposure prophylaxis, and one did not report this clearly. Four trials recruited residents in endemic areas, and one trial recruited soldiers who experienced limited time exposure. The participants' ages in the included trials were 10 to 80 years. Follow-up ranged from one to three months. Antibiotics versus placebo Doxycycline compared with placebo may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.83; 1 trial, 782 participants; low-certainty evidence). Prophylactic antibiotics may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.26; 5 trials, 2593 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may result in little to no difference in the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of laboratory confirmation (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.08; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis with laboratory confirmation (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.26; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics compared with placebo may increase non-serious adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 10.13, 95% CI 2.40 to 42.71; 3 trials, 1909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One antibiotic versus another antibiotic One trial assessed doxycycline versus azithromycin but did not report mortality. Compared to azithromycin, doxycycline may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.32; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), and on non-serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.48; 1 trial, 137 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. None of the five included trials reported serious adverse events or assessed quality of life. One study is awaiting classification. Funding Four of the five trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources, and the remaining trial did not include this. Three of the four trials that disclosed their supporting sources received the supply of trial drugs directly from the same pharmaceutical company, and the remaining trial received financial support from a governmental source.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo or another antibiotic has little or have no effect on all-cause mortality or leptospirosis infection because the certainty of evidence is low or very low. We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo may increase the overall risk of non-serious adverse events because of very low-certainty evidence. We lack definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for the prophylaxis of leptospirosis infection. We lack trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Doxycycline; Azithromycin; Quality of Life; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Penicillins; Leptospirosis
PubMed: 38483067
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014959.pub2 -
International Journal of Oral and... Sep 2022The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether antibiotics, compared to placebo, can prevent infection or dry socket after third molar surgery. A systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether antibiotics, compared to placebo, can prevent infection or dry socket after third molar surgery. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed following registration of the protocol (CRD42021276266). Four databases and the grey literature were searched, and papers were selected based on the PICOS question. RoB 2 and GRADE were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence, respectively. The NMA was performed using Stata. Of 58 randomized clinical trials identified, 34 were included in the NMA. Patients treated with amoxicillin (relative risk (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38-0.84; low quality of evidence) and those treated with metronidazole (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.84; low quality of evidence) showed a lower risk of infection and dry socket when compared to patients given a placebo. Postoperative amoxicillin (750 mg) and amoxicillin plus clavulanate (500 mg + 125 mg, or 2000 mg + 125 mg), and preoperative metronidazole (800 mg) are useful to prevent infection or dry socket when compared to placebo. The low rate of infection after third molar surgery, the correct concept of antibiotic prophylaxis, and antibiotic resistance must be taken into account when choosing to treat healthy patients undergoing third molar surgery with antibiotics.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Dry Socket; Humans; Metronidazole; Molar, Third; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 35527115
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.04.001 -
European Journal of Medical Research Aug 2023To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy for radically eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy for radically eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori).
METHODS
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases were searched up to July 7, 2022, to identify clinical trials comparing the efficacy of VA dual therapy and triple therapy for H. pylori eradication. After evaluating the quality of the included studies, random effects models were conducted, and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the efficacy and safety of each approach.
RESULTS
Six publications (including four randomized controlled trials) involving 2019 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, the eradication rate for VA dual therapy was 89.9%, while it was 85.2% for triple therapy based on other acid inhibitors. The eradication rate of H. pylori in the VA dual regimen group was higher than that in the PPI-based (omeprazole or lansoprazole) triple therapy group (RR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.23, p < 0.0001). However, the efficacy of VA dual therapy was comparable with VA-Clarithromycin (VAC) triple therapy (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.93-1.02). Besides, the incidence of adverse reactions in VA dual therapy was also lower than that in triple therapy (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91, p = 0.0009).
CONCLUSION
Compared with PPI-based triple therapy, VA dual therapy showed a better therapeutic effect, safety and patient compliance rate for eradicating H. pylori, which should be used as a novel curative strategy in the future.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37550781
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01249-6 -
The Journal of Antimicrobial... Apr 2023Penicillin allergy labels are commonly acquired in childhood and lead to avoidance of first-line penicillin antibiotics. Understanding the health outcomes of penicillin...
BACKGROUND
Penicillin allergy labels are commonly acquired in childhood and lead to avoidance of first-line penicillin antibiotics. Understanding the health outcomes of penicillin allergy testing (PAT) can strengthen its place in antimicrobial stewardship efforts.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and summarize the health outcomes of PAT in children.
METHODS
Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS and CINAHL were searched from inception to 11 Oct 2021 (Embase and MEDLINE updated April 2022). Studies that utilized in vivo PAT in children (≤18 years old) and reported outcomes relevant to the study objectives were included.
RESULTS
Thirty-seven studies were included in the review, with a total of 8411 participants. The most commonly reported outcomes were delabelling, subsequent penicillin courses, and tolerability to penicillin courses. Ten studies had patient-reported tolerability to subsequent penicillin use, with a median 93.6% (IQR 90.3%-97.8%) of children tolerating a subsequent course of penicillins. In eight studies, a median 97.3% (IQR 96.4%-99.0%) of children were reported as 'delabelled' after a negative PAT without further definition. Three separate studies verified delabelling by checking electronic or primary care medical records, where 48.0%-68.3% children were delabelled. No studies reported on outcomes relating to disease burden such as antibiotic resistance, mortality, infection rates or cure rates.
CONCLUSIONS
Safety and efficacy of PAT and subsequent penicillin use was the focus of existing literature. Further research is required to determine the long-term impact of delabelling penicillin allergies on disease burden.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Penicillins; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Hypersensitivity; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Hypersensitivity
PubMed: 36879500
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkad052 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jun 2023The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of patient-performed or administered adjunctive measures to non-surgical peri-implantitis therapy in terms... (Review)
Review
AIM
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of patient-performed or administered adjunctive measures to non-surgical peri-implantitis therapy in terms of probing depth (PD) and/or bleeding on probing (BoP) reductions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Randomized and controlled clinical trials with at least 6 months of follow-up were searched in three databases. Secondary outcomes included implant loss, disease resolution, recurrence of peri-implantitis, need of re-treatment, changes in marginal bone levels, patient-reported outcomes and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Of 567 titles, 10 publications, reporting 9 investigations, were included. Three types of adjunctive measures were found (local/systemic antimicrobials and probiotics). Four studies evaluated the effects of local antimicrobials (i.e., minocycline microspheres, chlorhexidine chips or a metronidazole + amoxicillin gel), three studies evaluated systemic antimicrobials (either amoxicillin + metronidazole or metronidazole alone) and two studies evaluated probiotics (Lactobacillus reuteri strains). The addition of local antimicrobials led to modest improvements in PD reduction. Systemic antimicrobials showed significantly greater reductions in PD and BoP, especially at initially deep sites (PD > 6 mm). Due to the large heterogeneity among included studies, no meta-analyses were performed.
CONCLUSIONS
Different adjunctive measures in the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis have different impact in terms of PD and BoP reductions. Improved PD reductions result after the use of systemic antimicrobials, and to a lesser extent, after the use of local antimicrobials.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Metronidazole; Minocycline; Amoxicillin; Anti-Infective Agents; Dental Implants
PubMed: 37143407
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13821 -
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology :... Dec 2023This study assessed the efficacy and safety between broad spectrum penicillin (P2) with or without beta-lactamase inhibitors (P2+) versus first and second generation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of broad spectrum penicillin with or without beta-lactamase inhibitors vs first and second generation cephalosporins as prophylactic antibiotics during cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
This study assessed the efficacy and safety between broad spectrum penicillin (P2) with or without beta-lactamase inhibitors (P2+) versus first and second generation cephalosporins (C1&C2) in the prevention of post-cesarean infections. Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in English and Chinese databases: nine RCTs were involved. Six trials compared P2+ vs C1&C2, no differences were found between interventions for endometritis, wound infection, urinary tract infection, febrile morbidity and maternal rashes. Four trials compared P2 vs C1&C2, no differences were found between interventions for endometritis, febrile morbidity, wound infection and urinary tract infection. Postoperative hospitalization was longer for women in P2 than C1&C2. Based on these results, P2/P2+ and C1&C2 may have similar efficacy on postoperative infections after cesarean section, there is no data on infant outcomes. CRD42022345721.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; beta-Lactamase Inhibitors; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Surgical Wound Infection; Endometritis; Penicillins; Urinary Tract Infections; Cesarean Section; Cephalosporins; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 37071668
DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2023.2195946 -
Microorganisms Jul 2023Higher valency pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV15 and PCV20) have been developed to address the disease burden of current non-vaccine serotypes. This review... (Review)
Review
Systematic Literature Review of the Epidemiological Characteristics of Pneumococcal Disease Caused by the Additional Serotypes Covered by the 20-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine.
Higher valency pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV15 and PCV20) have been developed to address the disease burden of current non-vaccine serotypes. This review describes the epidemiological characteristics of serotypes beyond PCV13 (serotypes 8, 10A, 11A, 12F, 15B/C, 22F, and 33F; PCV20nonPCV13 serotypes). Peer-reviewed studies published between 1 January 2010 (the year PCV13 became available) and 18 August 2020 were systematically reviewed (PROSPERO number: CRD42021212875). Data describing serotype-specific outcomes on disease proportions, incidence, severity, and antimicrobial non-susceptibility were summarized for individual and aggregate PCV20nonPCV13 serotypes by age group and by type and duration of pediatric PCV immunization program. Of 1168 studies, 127 (11%) were included in the analysis. PCV20nonPCV13 serotypes accounted for 28% of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), although the most frequent serotypes differed between children (10A, 15B/C) and adults (8, 12F, 22F). In children, serotype 15B/C tended to be more frequently associated with pneumococcal meningitis and acute otitis media; in adults, serotype 8 was more frequently associated with pneumonia and serotype 12F with meningitis. Serotypes 10A and 15B/C in children and 11A and 15B/C in adults were often associated with severe IPD. Serotype 15B/C was also among the most frequently identified penicillin/macrolide non-susceptible PCV20nonPCV13 serotypes. These results could inform decision making about higher valency PCV choice and use.
PubMed: 37512988
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms11071816 -
Research in Veterinary Science Aug 2023Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is a frequent and major etiological agent of bacterial bovine mastitis, leading to high economic losses. This pathogen readily becomes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is a frequent and major etiological agent of bacterial bovine mastitis, leading to high economic losses. This pathogen readily becomes resistant to many antibiotics, resulting in persistent noncurable intramammary infection (IMI) in animals and the development of multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) of S. aureus strains causing bovine mastitis in Iran according to published data from 2000 to 2021. As there is still a dearth of information on the AMR of S. aureus from Iranian bovine mastitis, the primary focus and subgroup analysis of the present study was performed on Iranian isolates. A systematic review was done according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Based on the initial search, 1006 article were identified. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria and removing duplications, 55 English articles and 13 Persian articles (a total of 68 articles) were finally analyzed. The highest overall prevalence of resistance was reported against penicillin G (p-estimate = 0.568 for all isolates, and p-estimate = 0.838 for Iranian isolates), followed by ampicillin (p-estimate = 0.554, and p-estimate = 0.670 for all isolates and Iranian isolates, respectively) and amoxicillin (p-estimate = 0.391, and p-estimate = 0.695 for all isolates and Iranian isolates, respectively). Besides, the lowest prevalence of resistant isolates was related to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (p-estimate = 0.108 and 0.118 for all isolates and Iranian isolates, respectively) and gentamycin (p-estimate = 0.163 and 0.190, for all isolates and Iranian isolates, respectively). Our analysis showed that the Iranian isolates were more resistant to all antibiotics than those of all isolates. This difference was significant in the case of penicillin G, ampicillin, and erythromycin at 5%. To the best of our knowledge, except for ampicillin, AMR has increased over time for all the studied antibiotics in Iranian isolates. This increased rate was significant for penicillin G, amoxicillin, and tetracycline (p < 0.1). No differences in AMR were detected regarding the mastitis types (clinical vs. subclinical mastitis) for almost evaluated antibiotics. In conclusion, the prevalence of AMR S. aureus isolated from IMI was high particularly for bovine mastitis used antibiotics like penicillin G and ampicillin. Additionally, according to the increasing rate of AMR S. aureus in recent years in Iran, control strategies should be reinforced to avoid the spread of this pathogen and drug resistance.
Topics: Animals; Cattle; Female; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Staphylococcus aureus; Iran; Mastitis, Bovine; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Staphylococcal Infections; Ampicillin; Drug Resistance, Microbial; Amoxicillin; Cattle Diseases
PubMed: 37302281
DOI: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2023.05.016 -
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology Apr 2024Secondary prevention with penicillin aims to prevent further episodes of acute rheumatic fever and subsequent development of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Penicillin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Secondary prevention with penicillin aims to prevent further episodes of acute rheumatic fever and subsequent development of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Penicillin allergy, self-reported by 10% of the population, can affect secondary prevention programs. We aimed to assess the role for (i) routine penicillin allergy testing and the (ii) safety of penicillin allergy delabeling approaches in this context. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, ISRCTN, and CPCI-S to identify the relevant reports. We found 2419 records, but no studies addressed our initial question. Following advice from the WHO-Guideline committee and experts, we identified 6 manuscripts on allergy testing focusing on other populations showing that the prevalence of allergy confirmed by testing was low and the incidence of life-threatening reactions to BPG was very low (< 1-3/1000 individuals treated). A subsequent search addressed penicillin allergy delabeling. This found 516 records, and 5 studies addressing the safety of direct oral drug challenge vs. skin testing followed by drug administration in patients with suspected penicillin allergy. Immediate allergic reactions of minor severity were observed for a minority of patients and occurred less frequently in the direct drug challenge group: 2.3% vs. 11.5%; RR = 0.25, 95%CI 0.15-0.45, P < 0.00001, I = 0%. No anaphylaxis or deaths were observed. Severe allergic reactions to penicillin are extremely rare and can be recognized and dealt by trained healthcare workers. Confirmation of penicillin allergy diagnosis or delabeling using direct oral drug challenge or penicillin skin testing seems to be safe and is associated with a low rate of adverse reactions.
Topics: Humans; Drug Hypersensitivity; Penicillins; Skin Tests; Practice Guidelines as Topic; World Health Organization; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 38696031
DOI: 10.1007/s12016-024-08988-2