-
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 -
Journal of Global Antimicrobial... Dec 2020Epidemiological surveillance is one critical approach to estimate and fight the burden of antibiotic resistance (AR). Here we summarise the characteristics of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Epidemiological surveillance is one critical approach to estimate and fight the burden of antibiotic resistance (AR). Here we summarise the characteristics of surveillance systems devoted to the surveillance of AR worldwide and published in the literature.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature available on PubMed from January 2007 to July 2019 (12.5 years). The keywords ('surveillance system' OR 'laboratory-based surveillance' OR 'syndromic surveillance' OR 'sentinel surveillance' OR 'integrated surveillance' OR 'population-based surveillance') AND ('antibiotic resistance' OR 'antimicrobial resistance') were used. This research was completed with AR monitoring systems available on websites.
RESULTS
We identified 71 AR surveillance systems described by 90 publications from 35 countries, including 64 (90.1%) national and 7 (9.9%) multinational surveillance systems. Two regions accounted for ∼72% of systems: European region (37; 52.1%) and Region of the Americas (14; 19.7%). Fifty-three focused on AR surveillance in humans, 12 studied both humans and animals, and 6 focused only on animals. The two most common bacterial species reported were Staphylococcus aureus (42; 59.2%) and Escherichia coli (39; 54.9%). Of the 71 AR surveillance systems, 20 (28.2%) used prevalence as an indicator, 3 (4.2%) used incidence and 7 (9.9%) used both. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp., S. aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae, penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae, and extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and carbapenem-resistant E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were monitored.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed heterogeneous surveillance systems. A 'One Health' approach is needed to monitor AR, with reference to the WHO Global Action Plan.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Escherichia coli; Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 33176216
DOI: 10.1016/j.jgar.2020.10.009 -
Digestion 2023Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter pylori eradication. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy for H. pylori eradication.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to June 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy and triple therapies for H. pylori eradication. Primary outcomes were cure rates and relative efficacy. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, dropout rate, and subgroup analysis.
RESULTS
Five studies with 1,852 patients were included in the analysis. The cure rates of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were 85.6% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 79.7-91.5% and 88.5% (95% CI: 83.2-93.8%) in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was not inferior to that of triple therapy with pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.10) and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.98-1.08) in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses; while it was significantly superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05-1.25, p = 0.001). For clarithromycin-resistant strains, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy showed superiority to vonoprazan-based triple therapy (86.7% vs. 71.4%, RR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03-1.39, p = 0.02); however, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was significant inferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy for clarithromycin-sensitive strains (83.0% vs. 92.8%, RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.95, p = 0.0002). The adverse effects of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were lower than those of triple therapy (21.2% vs. 26.5%, RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01, p = 0.06), especially the incidence of diarrhea (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy is noninferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy but superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy and has less side effects. Patients with clarithromycin-resistant strains are particularly expected to benefit from vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Clarithromycin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Pyrroles; Lansoprazole; Omeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37015201
DOI: 10.1159/000529622 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Jan 2021Having a penicillin allergy label associates with a higher risk for antibiotic resistance and increased health care use. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Having a penicillin allergy label associates with a higher risk for antibiotic resistance and increased health care use.
OBJECTIVE
We sought to assess the accuracy of skin tests and specific IgE quantification in the diagnostic evaluation of patients reporting a penicillin/β-lactam allergy.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis, searching on MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science. We included studies conducted in patients reporting a penicillin allergy and in whom skin tests and/or specific IgE quantification were performed and compared with drug challenge results. We quantitatively assessed the accuracy of diagnostic tests with bivariate random-effects meta-analyses. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore causes of heterogeneity. Studies' quality was evaluated using QUADAS-2 criteria.
RESULTS
We included 105 primary studies, assessing 31,761 participants. Twenty-seven studies were assessed by bivariate meta-analysis. Skin tests had a summary sensitivity of 30.7% (95% CI, 18.9%-45.9%) and a specificity of 96.8% (95% CI, 94.2%-98.3%), with a partial area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.686 (I = 38.2%). Similar results were observed for subanalyses restricted to patients reporting nonimmediate maculopapular exanthema or urticaria/angioedema. Specific IgE had a summary sensitivity of 19.3% (95% CI, 12.0%-29.4%) and a specificity of 97.4% (95% CI, 95.2%-98.6%), with a partial area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.420 (I = 8.5%). Projected predictive values mainly reflect the low frequency of true penicillin allergy.
CONCLUSIONS
Skin tests and specific IgE quantification appear to have low sensitivity and high specificity. Because current evidence is insufficient for assessing the role of these tests in stratifying patients for delabeling, we identified key requirements needed for future studies.
Topics: Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Immunoglobulin E; Penicillins; Skin Tests
PubMed: 32446963
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2020.04.058 -
The Journal of Laryngology and Otology Sep 2023Peritonsillar abscess is a localised infection in the peritonsillar space. Pus from the abscess can contain anaerobes. Many clinicians prescribe metronidazole in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Peritonsillar abscess is a localised infection in the peritonsillar space. Pus from the abscess can contain anaerobes. Many clinicians prescribe metronidazole in addition to penicillin, but evidence to support this is limited. This review assessed the evidence of benefit of metronidazole for the treatment of peritonsillar abscess.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted of the literature and databases including Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, PubMed and Cochrane library. Search terms included all variations of peritonsillar abscess, penicillin and metronidazole.
RESULTS
Three randomised, control trials were included. All studies assessed the clinical outcomes after treatment for peritonsillar abscess, including recurrence rate, length of hospital stay and symptom improvement. There was no evidence to suggest additional benefit with metronidazole, with studies suggesting increased side effects.
CONCLUSION
Evidence does not support the addition of metronidazole in first-line management of peritonsillar abscess. Further trials to establish optimum dose and duration schedules of oral phenoxymethylpenicillin would benefit clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Peritonsillar Abscess; Metronidazole; Penicillins; Penicillin V; Drainage; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 37194922
DOI: 10.1017/S0022215123000804 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Trachoma is the world's leading infectious cause of blindness. In 1996, WHO launched the Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma by the year 2020, based on the...
BACKGROUND
Trachoma is the world's leading infectious cause of blindness. In 1996, WHO launched the Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma by the year 2020, based on the 'SAFE' strategy (surgery, antibiotics, facial cleanliness, and environmental improvement).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence supporting the antibiotic arm of the SAFE strategy by assessing the effects of antibiotics on both active trachoma (primary objective), Chlamydia trachomatis infection of the conjunctiva, antibiotic resistance, and adverse effects (secondary objectives).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched relevant electronic databases and trials registers. The date of the last search was 4 January 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that satisfied either of two criteria: (a) trials in which topical or oral administration of an antibiotic was compared to placebo or no treatment in people or communities with trachoma, (b) trials in which a topical antibiotic was compared with an oral antibiotic in people or communities with trachoma. We also included studies addressing different dosing strategies in the population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 14 studies where individuals with trachoma were randomised and 12 cluster-randomised studies. Any antibiotic versus control (individuals)Nine studies (1961 participants) randomised individuals with trachoma to antibiotic or control (no treatment or placebo). All of these studies enrolled children and young people with active trachoma. The antibiotics used in these studies included topical (oxy)tetracycline (5 studies), doxycycline (2 studies), and sulfonamides (4 studies). Four studies had more than two study arms. In general these studies were poorly reported, and it was difficult to judge risk of bias.These studies provided low-certainty evidence that people with active trachoma treated with antibiotics experienced a reduction in active trachoma at three months (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.89; 1961 people; 9 RCTs; I = 73%) and 12 months (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.00; 1035 people; 4 RCTs; I = 90%). Low-certainty evidence was available for ocular infection at three months (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.04; 297 people; 4 RCTs; I = 0%) and 12 months (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78; 129 people; 1 RCT). None of these studies assessed antimicrobial resistance. In those studies that reported harms, no serious adverse effects were reported (low-certainty evidence).Oral versus topical antibiotics (individuals)Eight studies (1583 participants) compared oral and topical antibiotics. Only one study included people older than 21 years of age. Oral antibiotics included azithromycin (5 studies), sulfonamides (2 studies), and doxycycline (1 study). Topical antibiotics included (oxy)tetracycline (6 studies), azithromycin (1 study), and sulfonamide (1 study). These studies were poorly reported, and it was difficult to judge risk of bias.There was low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in effect between oral and topical antibiotics on active trachoma at three months (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16; 953 people; 6 RCTs; I = 63%) and 12 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15; 886 people; 5 RCTs; I = 56%). There was very low-certainty evidence for ocular infection at three or 12 months. Antimicrobial resistance was not assessed. In those studies that reported adverse effects, no serious adverse effects were reported; one study reported abdominal pain with azithromycin; one study reported a couple of cases of nausea with azithromycin; and one study reported three cases of reaction to sulfonamides (low-certainty evidence).Oral azithromycin versus control (communities)Four cluster-randomised studies compared antibiotic with no or delayed treatment. Data were available on active trachoma at 12 months from two studies but could not be pooled because of reporting differences. One study at low risk of bias found a reduced prevalence of active trachoma 12 months after a single dose of azithromycin in communities with a high prevalence of infection (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.65; 1247 people). The other, lower quality, study in low-prevalence communities reported similar median prevalences of infection at 12 months: 9.3% in communities treated with azithromycin and 8.2% in untreated communities. We judged this moderate-certainty evidence for a reduction in active trachoma with treatment, downgrading one level for inconsistency between the two studies. Two studies reported ocular infection at 12 months and data could be pooled. There was a reduction in ocular infection (RR 0.36, 0.31 to 0.43; 2139 people) 12 months after mass treatment with a single dose compared with no treatment (moderate-certainty evidence). There was high-certainty evidence of an increased risk of resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli to azithromycin, tetracycline, and clindamycin in communities treated with azithromycin, with approximately 5-fold risk ratios at 12 months. The evidence did not support increased resistance to penicillin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. None of the studies measured resistance to C trachomatis. No serious adverse events were reported. The main adverse effect noted for azithromycin (˜10%) was abdominal pain, vomiting, and nausea.Oral azithromycin versus topical tetracycline (communities)Three cluster-randomised studies compared oral azithromycin with topical tetracycline. The evidence was inconsistent for active trachoma and ocular infection at three and 12 months (low-certainty evidence) and was not pooled due to considerable heterogeneity. Antimicrobial resistance and adverse effects were not reported.Different dosing strategiesSix studies compared different strategies for dosing. There were: mass treatment at different dosing intervals; applying cessation or stopping rules to mass treatment; strategies to increase mass treatment coverage. There was no strong evidence to support any variation in the recommended annual mass treatment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antibiotic treatment may reduce the risk of active trachoma and ocular infection in people infected with C trachomatis, compared to no treatment/placebo, but the size of the treatment effect in individuals is uncertain. Mass antibiotic treatment with single dose oral azithromycin reduces the prevalence of active trachoma and ocular infection in communities. There is no strong evidence to support any variation in the recommended periodicity of annual mass treatment. There is evidence of an increased risk of antibiotic resistance at 12 months in communities treated with antibiotics.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chlamydia trachomatis; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Trachoma; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31554017
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001860.pub4 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Aug 2022spp. are non-motile, facultative anaerobic, Gram-negative coccobacilli that are commonly found in the oral cavity and the gastrointestinal tract of some animals and are... (Review)
Review
spp. are non-motile, facultative anaerobic, Gram-negative coccobacilli that are commonly found in the oral cavity and the gastrointestinal tract of some animals and are known to be the cause of infections. Usually, infections by spp. in humans is more common in the context of an animal bite leading to a skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI). Infective endocarditis (IE) is rarely caused by spp.; however, it can pose diagnostic and therapeutic dilemmas due to its rarity. The aim of the present study was to systematically review all cases of IE by spp. in the literature. A systematic review was performed of PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library (through 20 December 2021) for studies providing data on epidemiology and clinical and microbiological characteristics as well as data on treatment and outcomes of IE by spp. A total of 28 studies containing data for 28 patients were included. Prosthetic valve was present in 21.4% of patients. The aorta was the most commonly involved intracardiac site. Fever, sepsis, septic shock and heart failure were the most common clinical presentations. Cephalosporins, aminopenicillins and penicillin were the antimicrobials used most commonly. Overall mortality was 17.9%.
PubMed: 36078964
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11175037 -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Jan 2023Maternal rectovaginal colonization with group B Streptococcus (GBS) or Streptococcus agalactiae is the most common pathway for this disease during the perinatal period.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Maternal rectovaginal colonization with group B Streptococcus (GBS) or Streptococcus agalactiae is the most common pathway for this disease during the perinatal period. This meta-analysis aimed to summarize existing data regarding maternal colonization, serotype profiles, and antibiotic resistance in China.
METHODS
Systematic literature reviews were conducted after searching 6 databases. Meta-analysis was applied to analyze colonization rate, serotype, and antimicrobial susceptibility of GBS clinical isolates in different regions of China. Summary estimates are presented using tables, funnel plots, forest plots, histograms, violin plots, and line plots.
RESULTS
The dataset regarding colonization included 52 articles and 195 303 pregnant women. Our estimate for maternal GBS colonization in China was 8.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.2%-8.9%). Serotypes Ia, Ib, III, and V account for 95.9% of identified isolates. Serotype III, which is frequently associated with the hypervirulent clonal complex, accounts for 46.4%. Among the maternal GBS isolates using multilocus sequence typing (MLST), ST19 (25.7%, 289/1126) and ST10 (25.1%, 283/1126) were most common, followed by ST12 (12.4%, 140/1126), ST17 (4.8%, 54/1126), and ST651 (3.7%, 42/1126). GBS was highly resistant to tetracycline (75.1% [95% CI 74.0-76.3%]) and erythromycin (65.4% [95% CI 64.5-66.3%]) and generally susceptible to penicillin, ampicillin, vancomycin, ceftriaxone, and linezolid. Resistance rates of GBS to clindamycin and levofloxacin varied greatly (1.0-99.2% and 10.3-72.9%, respectively). A summary analysis of the bacterial drug resistance reports released by the China Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (CARSS) in the past 5 years showed that the drug resistance rate of GBS to erythromycin, clindamycin, and levofloxacin decreased slowly from 2018 to 2020. However, the resistance rates of GBS to all 3 antibiotics increased slightly in 2021.
CONCLUSIONS
The overall colonization rate in China was much lower than the global colonization rate (17.4%). Consistent with many original and review reports in other parts of the world, GBS was highly resistant to tetracycline. However, the resistance of GBS isolates in China to erythromycin and clindamycin was greater than in other countries. This paper provides important epidemiological information, to assist with prevention and treatment of GBS colonization in these women.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Clindamycin; Streptococcal Infections; Levofloxacin; Streptococcus agalactiae; Multilocus Sequence Typing; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Erythromycin; Tetracycline; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; China; Microbial Sensitivity Tests
PubMed: 36639677
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-023-00553-7 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Mar 2022is the most clinically relevant species among spp. For decades, it was considered to be part of the normal human flora in the upper respiratory tract. However, since... (Review)
Review
is the most clinically relevant species among spp. For decades, it was considered to be part of the normal human flora in the upper respiratory tract. However, since the late 1970s, considerable evidence has proposed that is an important pathogen in the human respiratory tract. Even though Infective Endocarditis (IE) is rarely caused by spp., these infections can be problematic due to the lack of experience in their management. The aim of this study was to systematically review all published cases of IE by spp. A systematic review of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane library (through 8 December 2021) for studies providing epidemiological, clinical, microbiological data as well as treatment data and outcomes of IE by spp. was performed. A total of 27 studies, containing data for 31 patients, were included. A prosthetic valve was present in 25.8%. Mitral valve was the most commonly infected site. Fever, sepsis and embolic phenomena were the most common clinical presentations. Cephalosporins, aminoglycosides, aminopenicillins and penicillin were the most commonly used antimicrobials. Overall mortality was 12.9%.
PubMed: 35407461
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11071854 -
Heliyon Jun 2023Water is essential for the survival of humans, animals and plants. Numerous research has been conducted on the prevalence and antibiotic resistance of () in water from... (Review)
Review
Water is essential for the survival of humans, animals and plants. Numerous research has been conducted on the prevalence and antibiotic resistance of () in water from various African countries, however, there is lack of comprehensive analysis of published literature. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines where articles published in English language between January 2000 and March 2022 were searched from ScienceDirect, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, African Journal Online (AJO), and Africa Index Medicus (AIM). Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) Ver 3.0 software was used to analyze the data. The pooled prevalence estimate (PPE) with 95% confidence interval was calculated using the random-effects model (CI). The overall PPE and antimicrobial resistance trends of isolated from water was screened from 4009 isolates which were isolated from 2586 samples. We extracted data from 17 studies including drinking water ( = 6), rivers (n = 5), wastewaters ( = 4) and wastewater/river ( = 1) which are all covering 27 countries in Africa with 3438 isolates. The PPE of in water was 71.7% (0.717; 95% CI: 0.562-0.833). The highest PPE antibiotic resistance was against penicillin followed by erythromycin, and ampicilin with resistance rates of 93.4%, 92.3%, and 69.4%, respectively. This systematic review provides critical evidence of consolidated prevalence and antibiotic resistance profiles, as well as regions where future studies and enhanced reporting could be beneficial in the African continent.
PubMed: 37274713
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16123