-
Nutrients Oct 2022() is the most prevalent etiology of gastritis worldwide. management depends mainly on antibiotics, especially the triple therapy formed of clarithromycin,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efficacy and Safety of Polaprezinc-Based Therapy versus the Standard Triple Therapy for Eradication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
() is the most prevalent etiology of gastritis worldwide. management depends mainly on antibiotics, especially the triple therapy formed of clarithromycin, amoxicillin, and proton pump inhibitors. Lately, many antibiotic-resistant strains have emerged, leading to a decrease in the eradication rates of Polaprezinc (PZN), a mucosal protective zinc-L-carnosine complex, may be a non-antibiotic agent to treat without the risk of resistance. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a PZN-based regimen for the eradication of This study used a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and Google Scholar until 25 July 2022. We used the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes presented with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We registered our protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022349231. We included 3 trials with a total of 396 participants who were randomized to either PZN plus triple therapy ( = 199) or triple therapy alone (control) ( = 197). Pooled OR found a statistical difference favoring the PZN arm in the intention to treat and per protocol eradication rates (OR: 2.01 with 95% CI [1.27, 3.21], 0.003) and (OR: 2.65 with 95% CI [1.55, 4.54], 0.0004), respectively. We found no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the total adverse events (OR: 1.06 with 95% CI [0.55, 2.06], 0.85). PZN, when added to the triple therapy, yielded a better effect concerning the eradication rates of with no difference in adverse event rates, and thus can be considered a valuable adjuvant for the management of However, the evidence is still scarce, and larger trials are needed to confirm or refute our findings.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Carnosine; Clarithromycin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Organometallic Compounds; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Zinc Compounds
PubMed: 36235778
DOI: 10.3390/nu14194126 -
Journal of Global Antimicrobial... Sep 2023The incidence of Helicobacter pylori (HP) is 25-50% in developed countries and 80% in developing countries, including 56.2% in China. However, antibiotic resistance of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The incidence of Helicobacter pylori (HP) is 25-50% in developed countries and 80% in developing countries, including 56.2% in China. However, antibiotic resistance of HP is a threat to HP control. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate primary drug resistance of HP in China.
METHODS
The full text of reports of the primary antibiotic resistance prevalence of HP was obtained from multiple databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Evimed, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Internet). Review Manager 5.2 was adopted for meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and bias analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the article quality.
RESULTS
In total, 38804 HP samples from 22 trials were extracted. The results suggested that the overall prevalence of amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, and levofloxacin resistance among HP in adults was as follows: mean difference (MD) = 1.35%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.03%, 1.68%]; MD = 23.76%, 95% CI [20.23%, 27.3%]; MD = 69.32%, 95% CI [64.85%, 73.8%]; and MD = 29.45%, 95% CI [4.90, 176.96], respectively. From the results of sensitivity and publication bias, we find that these results are robust and had little publication bias.
CONCLUSION
Our research showed that in China, the prevalence of HP resistance to primary antibiotics warrants attention, especially with regard to metronidazole, levofloxacin, and clarithromycin.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Metronidazole; Clarithromycin; Levofloxacin; Helicobacter pylori; Helicobacter Infections; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Anti-Bacterial Agents; China
PubMed: 37315738
DOI: 10.1016/j.jgar.2023.05.014 -
Journal of Clinical and Experimental... Oct 2022Patients with odontogenic infections are commonly prescribed antimicrobials on an experiential base without knowing the precise microorganisms implicated. The aim of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patients with odontogenic infections are commonly prescribed antimicrobials on an experiential base without knowing the precise microorganisms implicated. The aim of this systematic scoping review is to evaluate the prevalence and proportions of antimicrobial-resistant species in patients with odontogenic infections.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic scoping review of scientific evidence was accomplished involving different databases.
RESULTS
Eight randomized clinical trials and 13 prospective observational studies were included. These investigations analyzed 1506 patients. The species that showed higher levels of resistance included aerobic and facultative anaerobe such as , and . In obligate anaerobes sampled were Peptostreptococcos spp., Bacteroides spp., and Prevotella spp. Staphylococcus showed resistance to ampicillin, piperacillin, clindamycin, amoxicillin, metronidazole, and penicillin. Streptococcus had resistance to metronidazole, clindamycin, doxycycline, penicillin, and amoxicillin. Peptostreptococcus spp. presented resistance to penicillin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, and cefalexin. Gram-negative microorganisms had resistance to tetracycline, ciprofloxacin, azithromycin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, and penicillin. Bacteroides spp. exhibited resistance to penicillin, erythromycin, and gentamicin. Prevotella spp. showed resistance to penicillin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, clindamycin, levofloxacin, and imipenem. Finally, Klebsiella spp. displayed resistance to ampicillin, amoxicillin, moxifloxacin, and cefalexin. Interestingly, one clinical trial showed that after therapy there was a reduction in sensitivity of 18% for azithromycin and 26% for spiramycin.
CONCLUSIONS
Most of the microorganisms had resistance to diverse groups of antimicrobials. Suitable antimicrobials must be prescribed founded on the microbial samples, culture susceptibility, and clinical progression of the odontogenic infection. Furthermore, it was observed high levels of resistance to antimicrobials that have been used in local and systemic therapy of oral cavity infections. A preponderance of anaerobic microorganisms over aerobic ones was observed. Antibiotic resistance, odontogenic infections, efficacy, microorganisms, scoping review.
PubMed: 36320675
DOI: 10.4317/jced.59830 -
International Journal of Environmental... Nov 2022The implementation of adjunctive antibiotics has been recommended for the therapy of peri-implantitis (PI). In this review, antibiotic resistance patterns in PI patients... (Review)
Review
The implementation of adjunctive antibiotics has been recommended for the therapy of peri-implantitis (PI). In this review, antibiotic resistance patterns in PI patients were assessed. A systematic scoping review of observational studies and trials was established in conjunction with the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. The SCOPUS, PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCIELO, Web of Science, and LILACS databases were reviewed along with the gray literature. The primary electronic examination produced 139 investigations. Finally, four observational studies met the selection criteria. These studies evaluated 214 implants in 168 patients. and mainly presented high resistance to tetracycline, metronidazole, and erythromycin in PI patients. Similarly, was also highly resistant to clindamycin and doxycycline. Other microorganisms such as , , and also presented significant levels of resistance to other antibiotics including amoxicillin, azithromycin, and moxifloxacin. However, most microorganisms did not show resistance to the combination amoxicillin metronidazole. Although the management of adjunctive antimicrobials in the therapy of PI is controversial, in this review, the resistance of relevant microorganisms to antibiotics used to treat PI, and usually prescribed in dentistry, was observed. Clinicians should consider the antibiotic resistance demonstrated in the treatment of PI patients and its public health consequences.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans; Drug Resistance, Microbial; Fusobacterium nucleatum; Porphyromonas gingivalis; Amoxicillin; Metronidazole; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 36497685
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192315609 -
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis study sought to review the efficacy of amoxicillin/metronidazole dose and duration time in the treatment of stage II - III grade... (Review)
Review
Amoxicillin/Metronidazole Dose Impact as an Adjunctive Therapy for Stage II - III Grade C Periodontitis (Aggressive Periodontitis) at 3- And 6-Month Follow-Ups: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review and meta-analysis study sought to review the efficacy of amoxicillin/metronidazole dose and duration time in the treatment of stage II - III grade C periodontitis (aggressive periodontitis) after current follow-up.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search of the literature was performed in three main databases for relevant articles published until 31 of December 2021. According to the PRISMA statement, the extracted data from selected articles were pooled. The weighted mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of clinical attachment level (CAL) gain and probing depth (PD) reduction at 3 and 6 months of follow-up were calculated. The heterogeneity of the data was evaluated by the I test.
RESULTS
The results of six randomized clinical trials revealed significant improvement of clinical parameters in moderate and severe pockets. Prescription of 400 to 500 mg metronidazole caused significant CAL gain changes just in moderate pockets (MD = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.53; P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Amoxicillin/metronidazole has positive short-term effects as an adjunct to scaling and root planning for treatment of stage II - III grade C periodontitis. Higher doses of metronidazole (400 to 500 mg) are required for optimal efficacy regarding clinical attachment level gain.
PubMed: 35574209
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2022.13102 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Vacuum and forceps assisted vaginal deliveries are reported to increase the incidence of postpartum infections and maternal readmission to hospital compared to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Vacuum and forceps assisted vaginal deliveries are reported to increase the incidence of postpartum infections and maternal readmission to hospital compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery. Prophylactic antibiotics may be prescribed to prevent these infections. However, the benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal deliveries is still unclear. This is an update of a review last published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing infectious puerperal morbidities in women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries including vacuum or forceps delivery, or both.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials comparing any prophylactic antibiotic regimens with placebo or no treatment in women undergoing vacuum or forceps deliveries were eligible. Participants were all pregnant women without evidence of infections or other indications for antibiotics of any gestational age. Interventions were any antibiotic prophylaxis (any dosage regimen, any route of administration or at any time during delivery or the puerperium).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias. Two review authors extracted the data independently using prepared data extraction forms. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion and a consensus reached through discussion with all review authors. We assessed methodological quality of the two included studies using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Two studies, involving 3813 women undergoing either vacuum or forceps deliveries, were included. One study involving 393 women compared the antibiotic intravenous cefotetan after cord clamping compared with no treatment. The other study involving 3420 women compared a single dose of intravenous amoxicillin and clavulanic acid with placebo using 20 mL of intravenous sterile 0.9% saline. The evidence suggests that prophylactic antibiotics reduce superficial perineal wound infection (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.69; women = 3420; 1 study; high-certainty evidence), deep perineal wound infection (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.69; women = 3420; 1 study; high-certainty evidence) and probably reduce wound breakdown (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.63; women = 2593; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). We are unclear about the effect on organ or space perineal wound infection (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.05; women = 3420; 1 study) and endometritis (average RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.64; 15/1907 versus 30/1906; women = 3813; 2 studies) based on low-certainty evidence with wide CIs that include no effect. Prophylactic antibiotics probably lower serious infectious complications (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.89; women = 3420; 1 study; high-certainty evidence). They also have an important effect on reduction of confirmed or suspected maternal infection. The two included studies did not report on fever or urinary tract infection. It is unclear, based on low-certainty evidence, whether prophylactic antibiotics have any impact on maternal adverse reactions (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.18 to 22.05; women = 2593; 1 study) and maternal length of stay (MD 0.09 days, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.41; women = 393; 1 study) as the CIs were wide and included no effect. Prophylactic antibiotics slightly improve perineal pain and health consequences of perineal pain and probably reduce costs. Prophylactic antibiotics did not have an important effect on dyspareunia (difficult or painful sexual intercourse) or breastfeeding at six weeks. Antibiotic prophylaxis may slightly improve maternal hospital re-admission and maternal health-related quality of life. Neonatal adverse reactions were not reported in any included trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Prophylactic intravenous antibiotics are effective in reducing infectious puerperal morbidities in terms of superficial and deep perineal wound infection or serious infectious complications in women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries without clinical indications for antibiotic administration after delivery. Prophylactic antibiotics slightly improve perineal pain and health consequences of perineal pain, probably reduce the costs, and may slightly reduce the maternal hospital re-admission and health-related quality of life. However, the effect on reduction of endometritis, organ or space perineal wound infection, maternal adverse reactions and maternal length of stay is unclear due to low-certainty evidence. As the evidence was mainly derived from a single multi-centre study conducted in a high-income setting, future well-designed randomised trials in other settings, particularly in low- and middle-income settings, are required to confirm the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery.
Topics: Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Cefotetan; Endometritis; Episiotomy; Extraction, Obstetrical; Female; Humans; Length of Stay; Obstetrical Forceps; Perineum; Pregnancy; Puerperal Infection; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection; Vacuum Extraction, Obstetrical; Vaginal Diseases
PubMed: 32215906
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004455.pub5 -
The Saudi Dental Journal Sep 2020
Review
PubMed: 32874066
DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.04.010 -
Dentistry Journal Apr 2022(1) Background: Antibiotics are used in every medical field including dentistry, where they are used for the prevention of postoperative complications in routine... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Antibiotics are used in every medical field including dentistry, where they are used for the prevention of postoperative complications in routine clinical practice during the third molar extraction. (2) Methods: This study is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The present systematic review aimed to evaluate and systematize the use of antibacterial drugs in order to prevent postoperative complications in outpatient oral surgery for wisdom teeth extraction. We conducted a systematic review using electronic databases such as Medline PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Considering inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included randomized clinical trials published up to 2021 investigating the antibiotic prescription for third molar extraction. (3) Results: We selected 10 studies after the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results showed that the most widely used antibiotic was amoxicillin both with and without clavulanic acid, in different dosages and duration. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups for development of postoperative complications. (4) Conclusions: Based on the analysis of the included studies, penicillin is currently the most widely prescribed group of antibiotics. The widespread use of this antibiotic group can lead to antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Due to increasing prevalence of bacteria resistance to penicillins, clinicians should carefully prescribe these antibiotics and be aware that the widespread use of amoxicillin may do more harm than good for the population.
PubMed: 35448066
DOI: 10.3390/dj10040072 -
Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) Feb 2021Concerns regarding increasing antibiotic resistance raise the question of the most appropriate oral antibiotic for empirical therapy in dentistry. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
Concerns regarding increasing antibiotic resistance raise the question of the most appropriate oral antibiotic for empirical therapy in dentistry. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the antibiotic choices and regimens used to manage acute dentoalveolar infections and their clinical outcomes. A systematic review was undertaken across three databases. Two authors independently screened and quality-assessed the included studies and extracted the antibiotic regimens used and the clinical outcomes. Searches identified 2994 studies, and after screening and quality assessment, 8 studies were included. In addition to incision and drainage, the antibiotics used to manage dentoalveolar infections included amoxicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, cefalexin, clindamycin, erythromycin, metronidazole, moxifloxacin, ornidazole and phenoxymethylpenicillin. Regimens varied in dose, frequency and duration. The vast majority of regimens showed clinical success. One study showed that patients who did not receive any antibiotics had the same clinical outcomes as patients who received broad-spectrum antibiotics. The ideal choice, regimen and spectrum of empirical oral antibiotics as adjunctive management of acute dentoalveolar infections are unclear. Given that all regimens showed clinical success, broad-spectrum antibiotics as first-line empirical therapy are unnecessary. Narrow-spectrum agents appear to be as effective in an otherwise healthy individual. This review highlights the effectiveness of dental treatment to address the source of infection as being the primary factor in the successful management of dentoalveolar abscesses. Furthermore, the role of antibiotics is questioned in primary space odontogenic infections, if drainage can be established.
PubMed: 33670844
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics10030240 -
Advances in Therapy Apr 2020The optimal evidence-based prophylactic antibiotic regimen for surgical site infections following major head and neck surgery remains a matter of debate. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal evidence-based prophylactic antibiotic regimen for surgical site infections following major head and neck surgery remains a matter of debate.
METHODS
Medline, Cochrane, and Embase were searched for the current best evidence. Retrieved manuscripts were screened according to the PRISMA guidelines. Included studies dealt with patients over 18 years of age that underwent clean-contaminated head and neck surgery (P) and compared the effect of an intervention, perioperative administration of different antibiotic regimens for a variable duration (I), with control groups receiving placebo, another antibiotic regimen, or the same antibiotic for a different postoperative duration (C), on surgical site infection rate as primary outcome (O) (PICO model). A systematic review was performed, and a selected group of trials investigating a similar research question was subjected to a random-effects model meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine studies were included in the systematic review. Compared with placebo, cefazolin, ampicillin-sulbactam, and amoxicillin-clavulanate were the most efficient agents. Benzylpenicillin and clindamycin were clearly less effective. Fifteen studies compared short- to long-term prophylaxis; treatment for more than 48 h did not further reduce wound infections. Meta-analysis of five clinical trials including 4336 patients, where clindamycin was compared with ampicillin-sulbactam, implied an increased infection rate for clindamycin-treated patients (OR = 2.73, 95% CI 1.50-4.97, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION
In clean-contaminated head and neck surgery, cefazolin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, and ampicillin-sulbactam for 24-48 h after surgery were associated with the highest prevention rate of surgical site infection.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Clinical Trials as Topic; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Sulbactam; Surgical Wound Infection; Time Factors
PubMed: 32141017
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-020-01269-2