-
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Jun 2021The Infectious Diseases Society of America recommends either a fluoroquinolone or a macrolide as a first-line antibiotic treatment for Legionella pneumonia, but it is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The Infectious Diseases Society of America recommends either a fluoroquinolone or a macrolide as a first-line antibiotic treatment for Legionella pneumonia, but it is unclear which antibiotic leads to optimal clinical outcomes. We compared the effectiveness of fluoroquinolone versus macrolide monotherapy in Legionella pneumonia using a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of literature in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to 1 June 2019. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing macrolide with fluoroquinolone monotherapy using clinical outcomes in patients with Legionella pneumonia were included. Twenty-one publications out of an initial 2073 unique records met the selection criteria. Following PRISMA guidelines, 2 reviewers participated in data extraction. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical cure, time to apyrexia, length of hospital stay (LOS), and the occurrence of complications. The review and meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019132901).
RESULTS
Twenty-one publications with 3525 patients met inclusion criteria. The mean age of the population was 60.9 years and 67.2% were men. The mortality rate for patients treated with fluoroquinolones was 6.9% (104/1512) compared with 7.4% (133/1790) among those treated with macrolides. The pooled odds ratio assessing risk of mortality for patients treated with fluoroquinolones versus macrolides was 0.94 (95% confidence interval, .71-1.25, I2 = 0%, P = .661). Clinical cure, time to apyrexia, LOS, and the occurrence of complications did not differ for patients treated with fluoroquinolones versus macrolides.
CONCLUSIONS
We found no difference in the effectiveness of fluoroquinolones versus macrolides in reducing mortality among patients with Legionella pneumonia.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Community-Acquired Infections; Fluoroquinolones; Humans; Legionella; Macrolides; Male; Middle Aged; Pneumonia
PubMed: 32296816
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa441 -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Jan 2020Because of the diverse etiologies of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and the limitations of current diagnostic modalities, serum procalcitonin levels have been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Because of the diverse etiologies of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and the limitations of current diagnostic modalities, serum procalcitonin levels have been proposed as a novel tool to guide antibiotic therapy. Outcome data from procalcitonin-guided therapy trials have shown similar mortality, but the essential question is whether the sensitivity and specificity of procalcitonin levels enable the practitioner to distinguish bacterial pneumonia, which requires antibiotic therapy, from viral pneumonia, which does not. In this meta-analysis of 12 studies in 2408 patients with CAP that included etiologic diagnoses and sufficient data to enable analysis, the sensitivity and specificity of serum procalcitonin were 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI], .37-.71; I2 = 95.5%) and 0.76 (95% CI, .62-.86; I2 = 94.1%), respectively. Thus, a procalcitonin level is unlikely to provide reliable evidence either to mandate administration of antibiotics or to enable withholding such treatment in patients with CAP.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Biomarkers; Calcitonin; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Community-Acquired Infections; Humans; Pneumonia; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Procalcitonin; Protein Precursors
PubMed: 31241140
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciz545 -
Brain, Behavior, and Immunity Oct 2020During the COVID-19 pandemic general medical complications have received the most attention, whereas only few studies address the potential direct effect on mental...
BACKGROUND
During the COVID-19 pandemic general medical complications have received the most attention, whereas only few studies address the potential direct effect on mental health of SARS-CoV-2 and the neurotropic potential. Furthermore, the indirect effects of the pandemic on general mental health are of increasing concern, particularly since the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic (2002-2003) was associated with psychiatric complications.
METHODS
We systematically searched the database Pubmed including studies measuring psychiatric symptoms or morbidities associated with COVID-19 among infected patients and among none infected groups the latter divided in psychiatric patients, health care workers and non-health care workers.
RESULTS
A total of 43 studies were included. Out of these, only two studies evaluated patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, whereas 41 evaluated the indirect effect of the pandemic (2 on patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders, 20 on medical health care workers, and 19 on the general public). 18 of the studies were case-control studies/compared to norm, while 25 of the studies had no control groups. The two studies investigating COVID-19 patients found a high level of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) (96.2%) and significantly higher level of depressive symptoms (p = 0.016). Patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders reported worsening of psychiatric symptoms. Studies investigating health care workers found increased depression/depressive symptoms, anxiety, psychological distress and poor sleep quality. Studies of the general public revealed lower psychological well-being and higher scores of anxiety and depression compared to before COVID-19, while no difference when comparing these symptoms in the initial phase of the outbreak to four weeks later. A variety of factors were associated with higher risk of psychiatric symptoms and/or low psychological well-being including female gender, poor-self-related health and relatives with COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
Research evaluating the direct neuropsychiatric consequences and the indirect effects on mental health is highly needed to improve treatment, mental health care planning and for preventive measures during potential subsequent pandemics.
Topics: Anxiety; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Depression; Disease Progression; Health Personnel; Humans; Mental Disorders; Mental Health; Mentally Ill Persons; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Psychological Distress; SARS-CoV-2; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
PubMed: 32485289
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.048 -
European Journal of Pediatrics Nov 2022Streptococcus pneumoniae is the most common typical bacterial cause of pneumonia among children. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 5-day Amoxicillin-based... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Streptococcus pneumoniae is the most common typical bacterial cause of pneumonia among children. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 5-day Amoxicillin-based empiric treatment. However, longer treatments are frequently used. This study aimed to compare shorter and longer Amoxicillin regimens for children with uncomplicated community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 5-day and 10-day courses of Amoxicillin for the treatment of CAP in children older than 6 months in an outpatient setting. Studies involving overlapping populations, lower-than-standard antibiotic doses, and hospitalized patients were excluded. The outcome of interest was clinical cure. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I statistics. Two independent authors conducted the critical appraisal of the included studies according to the RoB-2 tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. We used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tool to evaluate the certainty of evidence of our results. Three RCTs and 789 children aged from 6 months to 10 years were included, of whom 385 (48.8%) underwent a 5-day regimen. Amoxicillin-based therapy was used in 774 (98%) patients. No differences were found between 5-day and 10-day therapy regarding clinical cure (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98-1.05; p = 0.49; I = 0%). Subgroup analysis of children aged 6-71 months showed no difference in the rates of the same outcome (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98-1.05; p = 0.38; I = 0%). The GRADE tool suggested moderate certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSION
These findings suggest that a short course of Amoxicillin (5 days) is just as effective as a longer course (10 days) for uncomplicated CAP in children under 10 years old. Nevertheless, generalizations should be made with caution considering the socioeconomic settings of the studies included.PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42022328519.
WHAT IS KNOWN
• In the outpatient setting, a few international guidelines recommend a 10-day Amoxicillin course as first-line treatment for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). • Recent trials have shown that shorter courses of Amoxicillin may be as effective as 10-day regimens in uncomplicated pneumonia.
WHAT IS NEW
• When comparing 5-day to 10-day Amoxicillin regimens, evidence suggests no significant difference in clinical cure rates for uncomplicated CAP in outpatient settings. • Generalizations should be made with caution considering the socioeconomic context of the population within the included studies.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Community-Acquired Infections; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Infant; Pneumonia
PubMed: 36066660
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-022-04603-8 -
Journal of Critical Care Apr 2024The role of corticosteroids in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains uncertain. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to investigate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The role of corticosteroids in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains uncertain. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and potential effect modifiers of adjunctive corticosteroids in patients with CAP.
METHODS
The protocol of this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022354920). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and trial registers from inception till March 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating corticosteroids in adult patients with CAP. Our primary outcome was the risk of all-cause mortality within 30 days after randomization (if not reported at day 30, we extracted the outcome closest to 30 days). Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MDs) were pooled under a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Fifteen RCTs (n = 3252 patients) were included in this review. Corticosteroids reduced the risk of all-cause mortality in CAP patients (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.53-0.89; high certainty). This significant result was restricted to hydrocortisone therapy and patients with severe CAP. Additionally, younger patients demonstrated a greater reduction in mortality. Corticosteroids reduced the incidence of shock and the need for mechanical ventilation (MV), and decreased the length of hospital and ICU stay (moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS
Corticosteroids reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, especially in younger patients receiving hydrocortisone, and probably decrease the need for MV, the incidence of shock, and the length of hospital and ICU stay in patients with CAP. Our findings indicate that patients with CAP, especially severe CAP, will benefit from adjunctive corticosteroid therapy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Community-Acquired Infections; Hydrocortisone; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38128217
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2023.154507 -
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory... Oct 2020The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Coagulation...
CONTEXT.—
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Coagulation dysfunction is a hallmark in patients with COVID-19. Fulminant thrombotic complications emerge as critical issues in patients with severe COVID-19.
OBJECTIVE.—
To present a review of the literature and discuss the mechanisms of COVID-19 underlying coagulation activation and the implications for anticoagulant and thrombolytic treatment in the management of COVID-19.
DATA SOURCES.—
We performed a systemic review of scientific papers on the topic of COVID-19, available online via the PubMed NCBI, medRxiv, and Preprints as of May 15, 2020. We also shared our experience on the management of thrombotic events in patients with COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS.—
COVID-19-associated coagulopathy ranges from mild laboratory alterations to disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) with a predominant phenotype of thrombotic/multiple organ failure. Characteristically, high D-dimer levels on admission and/or continuously increasing concentrations of D-dimer are associated with disease progression and poor overall survival. SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers the immune-hemostatic response. Drastic inflammatory responses including, but not limited to, cytokine storm, vasculopathy, and NETosis may contribute to an overwhelming activation of coagulation. Hypercoagulability and systemic thrombotic complications necessitate anticoagulant and thrombolytic interventions, which provide opportunities to prevent or reduce "excessive" thrombin generation while preserving "adaptive" hemostasis and bring additional benefit via their anti-inflammatory effect in the setting of COVID-19.
Topics: Betacoronavirus; Blood Coagulation Disorders; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Humans; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; SARS-CoV-2; Thrombosis
PubMed: 32551814
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2020-0324-SA -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Feb 2023Doxycycline has been recommended as a treatment option for non-severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adults. We sought to review the evidence for the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Doxycycline has been recommended as a treatment option for non-severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adults. We sought to review the evidence for the efficacy of doxycycline in adult patients with mild-to-moderate CAP.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of doxycycline versus comparator to assess the clinical efficacy. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate. Random effects model meta-analyses were used to generate pooled odds ratio (OR) and evaluate heterogeneity (I2). Risk of bias (RoB) and quality of evidence (QoE) were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and GRADE methods, respectively.
RESULTS
We included 6 RCTs with 834 clinically evaluable patients. The trials were performed between 1984 and 2004. Comparators were 3 macrolides (roxithromycin, spiramycin, and erythromycin) and 3 fluoroquinolones (ofloxacin, fleroxacin, and levofloxacin). Four trials had an overall high RoB. The clinical cure rate was similar between the doxycycline and comparator groups (87.2% [381/437] vs 82.6% [328/397]; OR 1.29 [95% confidence interval {CI}: .73-2.28]; I2 = 30%; low QoE). Subgroup analysis of two studies with a low RoB showed significantly higher clinical cure rates in the doxycyline group (87.1% [196/225] vs 77.8% [165/212]; OR 1.92 [95% CI: 1.15-3.21]; P = .01; I2 = 0%). Adverse event rates were comparable between the doxycycline and comparator groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of doxycycline was comparable to macrolides or fluoroquinolones in mild-to-moderate CAP and thus represents a viable treatment option. Considering the lack of recent trials, it warrants large-scale clinical trials.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Doxycycline; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Macrolides; Fluoroquinolones; Pneumonia
PubMed: 35903011
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciac615 -
Globalization and Health Jul 2020The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on public mental health. Therefore, monitoring and oversight of the population mental health during crises such as a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on public mental health. Therefore, monitoring and oversight of the population mental health during crises such as a panedmic is an immediate priority. The aim of this study is to analyze the existing research works and findings in relation to the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHOD
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, articles that have focused on stress and anxiety prevalence among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic were searched in the Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (ISI) and Google Scholar databases, without a lower time limit and until May 2020. In order to perform a meta-analysis of the collected studies, the random effects model was used, and the heterogeneity of studies was investigated using the I index. Moreover. data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software.
RESULTS
The prevalence of stress in 5 studies with a total sample size of 9074 is obtained as 29.6% (95% confidence limit: 24.3-35.4), the prevalence of anxiety in 17 studies with a sample size of 63,439 as 31.9% (95% confidence interval: 27.5-36.7), and the prevalence of depression in 14 studies with a sample size of 44,531 people as 33.7% (95% confidence interval: 27.5-40.6).
CONCLUSION
COVID-19 not only causes physical health concerns but also results in a number of psychological disorders. The spread of the new coronavirus can impact the mental health of people in different communities. Thus, it is essential to preserve the mental health of individuals and to develop psychological interventions that can improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Topics: Anxiety; Asia; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Depression; Europe; Humans; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Prevalence; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 32631403
DOI: 10.1186/s12992-020-00589-w -
Age and Ageing Jan 2021aspiration pneumonia increases hospitalisation and mortality of older people in residential aged care. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
aspiration pneumonia increases hospitalisation and mortality of older people in residential aged care.
OBJECTIVES
determine potentially pathogenic microorganisms in oral specimens of older people with aspiration pneumonia and the effect of professional oral care in reducing aspiration pneumonia risk.
DATA SOURCES
PUBMED/MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, COCHRANE, PROQUEST, Google Scholar, Web of Science.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
published between January 2001 and December 2019 addressing oral microorganisms, aspiration pneumonia, oral health and treatment.
PARTICIPANTS
people 60 years and older in residential aged care.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Intervention Trials checklist.
RESULTS
twelve studies (four cross-sectional, five cohort and three intervention) reported colonisation of the oral cavity of older people by microorganisms commonly associated with respiratory infections. Aspiration pneumonia occurred less in people who received professional oral care compared with no such care. Isolation of Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant S. aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was related to mortality due to aspiration pneumonia. An interesting finding was isolation of Escherichia coli, a gut bacterium.
LIMITATIONS
more information may be present in publications about other co-morbidities that did not meet inclusion criteria. A high degree of heterogeneity prevented a meta-analysis. Issues included sampling size, no power and effect size calculations; different oral health assessments; how oral specimens were analysed and how aspiration pneumonia was diagnosed.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
pathogenic microorganisms colonising the oral microbiome are associated with aspiration pneumonia in older people in residential care; professional oral hygiene care is useful in reducing aspiration pneumonia risk.
Topics: Aged; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Oral Health; Oral Hygiene; Pneumonia, Aspiration
PubMed: 32677660
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afaa102 -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Feb 2023The optimal treatment duration of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children has been controversial in high-income countries. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal treatment duration of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children has been controversial in high-income countries. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare short antibiotic treatment (3-5 days) with longer treatment (7-10 days) among children aged ≥6 months.
METHODS
On 31 January 2022, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for studies published in English from 2003 to 2022. We included randomized controlled trials focusing on antibiotic treatment duration in children with CAP treated as outpatients. We calculated risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals and used the fixed-effect model (low heterogeneity). Our main outcome was treatment failure, defined as need for retreatment or hospitalization within 1 month. Our secondary outcome was presence of antibiotic-related harms.
RESULTS
A total of 541 studies were screened, and 4 studies with 1541 children were included in the review. Three studies had low risk of bias, and one had some concerns. All 4 studies assessed treatment failures, and the RD was 0.1% (95% confidence interval, -3.0% to 2.0%) with high quality of evidence. Two studies (1194 children) assessed adverse events related to antibiotic treatment, and the RD was 0.0% (-5.0% to 5.0%) with moderate quality of evidence. The diagnostic criteria varied between the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
A short antibiotic treatment duration of 3-5 days was equally effective and safe compared with the longer (current) recommendation of 7-10 days in children aged ≥6 months with CAP. We suggest that short antibiotic courses can be implemented in treatment of pediatric CAP.
Topics: Child; Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Outpatients; Duration of Therapy; Developed Countries; Pneumonia; Community-Acquired Infections
PubMed: 35579504
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciac374