-
Microbial Drug Resistance (Larchmont,... Mar 2023Turkey presents both a high prevalence of infection and high prevalence of antibiotic resistance. In this study, we aimed to summarize recent data on antibiotic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Turkey presents both a high prevalence of infection and high prevalence of antibiotic resistance. In this study, we aimed to summarize recent data on antibiotic resistance rates in this nation. After conducting searches in two national and international databases (ULAKBIM, EKUAL, and PubMed), a systematic review was conducted. A total of 197 original articles on antibiotic resistance of in Turkey were collected. After screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria, to evaluate the antibiotic resistance for the period 2005-2020, 20 eligible articles were included in the meta-analysis. Data analysis was performed using MedCalc 12.7.0. The number of isolated strains in each study was weighted, and pooled proportion analysis was performed. This review included 20 Turkish studies, including 1,556 strains. The overall resistance rates were as follows: clarithromycin (CLA), 26.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.5-33.5); metronidazole (MTZ), 28.4% (95% CI: 19.7-38.1); levofloxacin (LVX), 19.6% (95% CI: 9.9-31.7); tetracycline (TET), 0.7% (95% CI: 0.1-1.8); and amoxicillin (AMO), 1.3% (95% CI: 0.3-3.1). The reported results showed that Turkish isolates are highly resistant to CLA, MTZ, and LVX, while exhibiting a low level of resistance toward AMO and TET.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Turkey; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Tetracycline; Amoxicillin; Clarithromycin; Metronidazole; Levofloxacin
PubMed: 36724307
DOI: 10.1089/mdr.2022.0146 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jan 2023Due to increasing resistance rates of () to different antibiotics, failures in eradication therapies are becoming more frequent. Even though eradication criteria and...
BACKGROUND
Due to increasing resistance rates of () to different antibiotics, failures in eradication therapies are becoming more frequent. Even though eradication criteria and treatment algorithms for first-line and second-line therapy against infection are well-established, there is no clear recommendation for third-line and rescue therapy in refractory infection.
AIM
To perform a systematic review evaluating the efficacy and safety of rescue therapies against refractory infection.
METHODS
A systematic search of available rescue treatments for refractory infection was conducted on the National Library of Medicine's PubMed search platform based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized or non-randomized clinical trials and observational studies evaluating the effectiveness of infection rescue therapies were included.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies were included in the analysis of mean eradication rates as rescue therapy, and 21 of these were selected for analysis of mean eradication rate as third-line treatment. For rifabutin-, sitafloxacin-, levofloxacin-, or metronidazole-based triple-therapy as third-line treatment, mean eradication rates of 81.6% and 84.4%, 79.4% and 81.5%, 55.7% and 60.6%, and 62.0% and 63.0% were found in intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. For third-line quadruple therapy, mean eradication rates of 69.2% and 72.1% were found for bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT), 88.9% and 90.9% for bismuth quadruple therapy, three-in-one, Pylera (BQT-Pylera), and 61.3% and 64.2% for non-BQT) in ITT and PP analysis, respectively. For rifabutin-, sitafloxacin-, levofloxacin-, or metronidazole-based triple therapy as rescue therapy, mean eradication rates of 75.4% and 78.8%, 79.4 and 81.5%, 55.7% and 60.6%, and 62.0% and 63.0% were found in ITT and PP analysis, respectively. For quadruple therapy as rescue treatment, mean eradication rates of 76.7% and 79.2% for BQT, 84.9% and 87.8% for BQT-Pylera, and 61.3% and 64.2% for non-BQT were found in ITT and PP analysis, respectively. For susceptibility-guided therapy, mean eradication rates as third-line and rescue treatment were 75.0% in ITT and 79.2% in PP analysis.
CONCLUSION
We recommend sitafloxacin-based triple therapy containing vonoprazan in regions with low macrolide resistance profile. In regions with known resistance to macrolides or unavailability of bismuth, rifabutin-based triple therapy is recommended.
Topics: Humans; Helicobacter Infections; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Metronidazole; Helicobacter pylori; Bismuth; Levofloxacin; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Macrolides; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Tetracycline; Rifabutin
PubMed: 36687120
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i2.390 -
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 -
Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy Feb 2023Ceftolozane-tazobactam is a novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitor combination with activity against Gram-negative bacteria (GNB). We aimed to comprehensively... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Ceftolozane-tazobactam is a novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitor combination with activity against Gram-negative bacteria (GNB). We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of ceftolozane-tazobactam in treating GNB infections in adult patients.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were retrieved until August 2022. Randomized trials and non-randomized controlled studies evaluating ceftolozane-tazobactam and its comparators in adult patients with GNB infections were included.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies were included. Overall, patients receiving ceftolozane-tazobactam had significant advantages in clinical cure (odds ratio [OR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.05-2.51) and microbiological eradication (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19-1.71), especially in -infected patients. Ceftolozane-tazobactam had a significant advantage in clinical success or microbial eradication compared with polymyxin/aminoglycosides (PL/AG) or levofloxacin. There were no significant differences in adverse events (AEs), infection (CDI), and mortality between ceftolozane-tazobactam and comparators. Notably, ceftolozane-tazobactam showed a significantly lower risk of acute kidney injury compared with PL/AG.
CONCLUSIONS
Ceftolozane-tazobactam showed excellent clinical and microbiological efficacy in treating GNB, especially -induced infections. The overall safety profile of ceftolozane-tazobactam was comparable to other antimicrobials, with no increased risk of CDI and obvious advantage over antibacterial agents with high nephrotoxicity.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aminoglycosides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cephalosporins; Gram-Negative Bacteria; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Monobactams; Polymyxins; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Pseudomonas Infections; Tazobactam
PubMed: 36629486
DOI: 10.1080/14787210.2023.2166931 -
The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine Jul 2023Despite a high urinary tract infection (UTI) rate in spinal cord injured patents in China, there is limited evidence on the epidemiological character of that. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Epidemiology of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance of nosocomial urinary tract infections in patients with spinal cord injuries in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Despite a high urinary tract infection (UTI) rate in spinal cord injured patents in China, there is limited evidence on the epidemiological character of that.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of our article was to characterize the distribution of pathogens of UTI patients with spinal cord injuries (SCI) and the resistance profile of pathogens.
METHODS
A literature search of six electronic databases was carried out to identify the incidence, pathogen distribution, and drug resistance of UTI after SCI based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was carried out using R 4.0.2 software; a subgroup analysis was performed by the year 2012.
RESULTS
We screened 1110 eligible studies, 33 were included in our final review. A total of 7271 bacterial species were included in our studies; 6092 were gram-negative (81.13% [76.83-85.11]) and 1003 were gram-positive (14.89% [11.70-18.38]). Before 2012, (45.43%) was the predominant isolated pathogen, followed by Klebsiella (7.49%) and Enterococcus (6.01%). After 2012, (50.23%) was the main pathogen, followed by Klebsiella (12.47%) and Proteus (6.88%). was more likely to be resistant to Levofloxacin, Amikacin, sulfonamides, 4th-generation cephalosporins and Nitrofurantoin before 2012 (81.8% vs. 62.9%, 32.0% vs. 7.6%, 81.3% vs. 61.6%, 81.8% vs. 24.1%, 33.5% vs. 5.1%), whereas was more frequently resistant to Inhibitor-resistant β-lactamas after 2012 (56.3% vs. 34.0%). was more likely to be resistant to Aztreonam, Amikacin before 2012 (80.0% vs. 39.8%, 48.1% vs. 19.0%). presented a high resistance to Levofloxacin, Inhibitor-resistant β-lactamas after 2012 (61.8% vs. 35.6%, 59.1% vs. 5.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
UTI in patients with SCI in China were mainly caused by gram-negative bacteria. We observed a remarkable modification in resistance profiles of pathogen distribution before 2012 and after 2012, which suggests reasonable control of the use of antibiotics has a positive effectiveness on resistance profiles.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Amikacin; Levofloxacin; Cross Infection; Escherichia coli; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Spinal Cord Injuries; Urinary Tract Infections
PubMed: 36622339
DOI: 10.1080/10790268.2022.2129154 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Postmarketing safety analysis is an effective supplement for new drugs in clinical practice. Therefore, we aimed to systematically assess the safety of oral nemonoxacin...
Postmarketing safety analysis is an effective supplement for new drugs in clinical practice. Therefore, we aimed to systematically assess the safety of oral nemonoxacin malate, the first approved C-8-methoxy non-fluorinated quinolone, in clinical studies and postmarketing safety surveillance. We electronically and manually searched and screened safety data (including premarketing and postmarketing data) of oral nemonoxacin from clinical registries. We standardized and summarized the reported adverse events according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities System Organ Class and Preferred Terms. We summarized and reported the number and frequency (%) of the AEs and serious AEs in patients with community-acquired pneumonia and in specific patients. Three Phase II/III comparator studies ( = 670, nemonoxacin), one Phase IV study ( = 461), two special population pharmacokinetic studies ( = 40), four observational studies ( = 1,852), and one 5-year postmarketing surveillance project ( = 257,420) were included in this study. The Phase II/III studies showed that the commonly reported drug-related AEs were similar for oral 500 mg nemonoxacin and levofloxacin treatments, which mainly included increased alanine aminotransferase levels (4.4% vs. 2.5%), neutropenia (2.5% vs. 4.4%), nausea (2.5% vs. 1.6%), and leukopenia (2.3% vs. 3.2%). No drug-related deaths were reported. Postmarketing safety surveillance revealed that known adverse drug reaction characteristics were generally unchanged. Pharmacokinetic data suggested that dose adjustment was not necessary in elderly patients, which was confirmed by a Phase IV study in an elderly population, in patients with renal impairment with CLcr ≥50 ml/min, and in those with mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment. Clinical trial data of approximately 1,450 patients and postmarketing data of >257,420 patients suggest that nemonoxacin is generally well tolerated and can be a suitable alternative to fluoroquinolones for patients with CAP.
PubMed: 36569296
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1067686 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Typhoid and paratyphoid (enteric fever) are febrile bacterial illnesses common in many low- and middle-income countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) currently... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Typhoid and paratyphoid (enteric fever) are febrile bacterial illnesses common in many low- and middle-income countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) currently recommends treatment with azithromycin, ciprofloxacin, or ceftriaxone due to widespread resistance to older, first-line antimicrobials. Resistance patterns vary in different locations and are changing over time. Fluoroquinolone resistance in South Asia often precludes the use of ciprofloxacin. Extensively drug-resistant strains of enteric fever have emerged in Pakistan. In some areas of the world, susceptibility to old first-line antimicrobials, such as chloramphenicol, has re-appeared. A Cochrane Review of the use of fluoroquinolones and azithromycin in the treatment of enteric fever has previously been undertaken, but the use of cephalosporins has not been systematically investigated and the optimal choice of drug and duration of treatment are uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of cephalosporins for treating enteric fever in children and adults compared to other antimicrobials.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov up to 24 November 2021. We also searched reference lists of included trials, contacted researchers working in the field, and contacted relevant organizations.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults and children with enteric fever that compared a cephalosporin to another antimicrobial, a different cephalosporin, or a different treatment duration of the intervention cephalosporin. Enteric fever was diagnosed on the basis of blood culture, bone marrow culture, or molecular tests.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were clinical failure, microbiological failure and relapse. Our secondary outcomes were time to defervescence, duration of hospital admission, convalescent faecal carriage, and adverse effects. We used the GRADE approach to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 RCTs with 2231 total participants published between 1986 and 2016 across Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East and the Caribbean, with comparisons between cephalosporins and other antimicrobials used for the treatment of enteric fever in children and adults. The main comparisons are between antimicrobials in most common clinical use, namely cephalosporins compared to a fluoroquinolone and cephalosporins compared to azithromycin. Cephalosporin (cefixime) versus fluoroquinolones Clinical failure, microbiological failure and relapse may be increased in patients treated with cefixime compared to fluoroquinolones in three small trials published over 14 years ago: clinical failure (risk ratio (RR) 13.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.24 to 55.39; 2 trials, 240 participants; low-certainty evidence); microbiological failure (RR 4.07, 95% CI 0.46 to 36.41; 2 trials, 240 participants; low-certainty evidence); relapse (RR 4.45, 95% CI 1.11 to 17.84; 2 trials, 220 participants; low-certainty evidence). Time to defervescence in participants treated with cefixime may be longer compared to participants treated with fluoroquinolones (mean difference (MD) 1.74 days, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.98, 3 trials, 425 participants; low-certainty evidence). Cephalosporin (ceftriaxone) versus azithromycin Ceftriaxone may result in a decrease in clinical failure compared to azithromycin, and it is unclear whether ceftriaxone has an effect on microbiological failure compared to azithromycin in two small trials published over 18 years ago and in one more recent trial, all conducted in participants under 18 years of age: clinical failure (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.57; 3 trials, 196 participants; low-certainty evidence); microbiological failure (RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.36 to 10.64, 3 trials, 196 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether ceftriaxone increases or decreases relapse compared to azithromycin (RR 10.05, 95% CI 1.93 to 52.38; 3 trials, 185 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time to defervescence in participants treated with ceftriaxone may be shorter compared to participants treated with azithromycin (mean difference of -0.52 days, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.12; 3 trials, 196 participants; low-certainty evidence). Cephalosporin (ceftriaxone) versus fluoroquinolones It is unclear whether ceftriaxone has an effect on clinical failure, microbiological failure, relapse, and time to defervescence compared to fluoroquinolones in three trials published over 28 years ago and two more recent trials: clinical failure (RR 3.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 19.81; 4 trials, 359 participants; very low-certainty evidence); microbiological failure (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.40 to 6.83; 3 trials, 316 participants; very low-certainty evidence); relapse (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.92; 3 trials, 297 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and time to defervescence (MD 2.73 days, 95% CI -0.37 to 5.84; 3 trials, 285 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether ceftriaxone decreases convalescent faecal carriage compared to the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.72; 1 trial, 73 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and length of hospital stay may be longer in participants treated with ceftriaxone compared to participants treated with the fluoroquinolone ofloxacin (mean of 12 days (range 7 to 23 days) in the ceftriaxone group compared to a mean of 9 days (range 6 to 13 days) in the ofloxacin group; 1 trial, 47 participants; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on very low- to low-certainty evidence, ceftriaxone is an effective treatment for adults and children with enteric fever, with few adverse effects. Trials suggest that there may be no difference in the performance of ceftriaxone compared with azithromycin, fluoroquinolones, or chloramphenicol. Cefixime can also be used for treatment of enteric fever but may not perform as well as fluoroquinolones. We are unable to draw firm general conclusions on comparative contemporary effectiveness given that most trials were small and conducted over 20 years previously. Clinicians need to take into account current, local resistance patterns in addition to route of administration when choosing an antimicrobial.
Topics: Child; Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Paratyphoid Fever; Typhoid Fever; Cephalosporins; Azithromycin; Ceftriaxone; Cefixime; Fluoroquinolones; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chloramphenicol; Anti-Infective Agents; Monobactams; Ciprofloxacin; Ofloxacin; Recurrence; Pakistan
PubMed: 36420914
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010452.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Inhaled antibiotics are commonly used to treat persistent airway infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa that contributes to lung damage in people with cystic fibrosis.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Inhaled antibiotics are commonly used to treat persistent airway infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa that contributes to lung damage in people with cystic fibrosis. Current guidelines recommend inhaled tobramycin for individuals with cystic fibrosis and persistent Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection who are aged six years or older. The aim is to reduce bacterial load in the lungs so as to reduce inflammation and deterioration of lung function. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of long-term inhaled antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis on clinical outcomes (lung function, frequency of exacerbations and nutrition), quality of life and adverse events (including drug-sensitivity reactions and survival).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched ongoing trials registries. Date of last search: 28 June 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected trials where people with cystic fibrosis received inhaled anti-pseudomonal antibiotic treatment for at least three months, treatment allocation was randomised or quasi-randomised, and there was a control group (either placebo, no placebo or another inhaled antibiotic).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected trials, judged the risk of bias, extracted data from these trials and judged the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE system.
MAIN RESULTS
The searches identified 410 citations to 125 trials; 18 trials (3042 participants aged between five and 45 years) met the inclusion criteria. Limited data were available for meta-analyses due to the variability of trial design and reporting of results. A total of 11 trials (1130 participants) compared an inhaled antibiotic to placebo or usual treatment for a duration between three and 33 months. Five trials (1255 participants) compared different antibiotics, two trials (585 participants) compared different regimens of tobramycin and one trial (90 participants) compared intermittent tobramycin with continuous tobramycin alternating with aztreonam. One trial (18 participants) compared an antibiotic to placebo and also to a different antibiotic and so fell into both groups. The most commonly studied antibiotic was tobramycin which was studied in 12 trials. Inhaled antibiotics compared to placebo We found that inhaled antibiotics may improve lung function measured in a variety of ways (4 trials, 814 participants). Compared to placebo, inhaled antibiotics may also reduce the frequency of exacerbations (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.93; 3 trials, 946 participants; low-certainty evidence). Inhaled antibiotics may lead to fewer days off school or work (quality of life measure) (mean difference (MD) -5.30 days, 95% CI -8.59 to -2.01; 1 trial, 245 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data for us to be able to report an effect on nutritional outcomes and there was no effect on survival. There was no effect on antibiotic resistance seen in the two trials that were included in meta-analyses. We are uncertain of the effect of the intervention on adverse events (very low-certainty evidence), but tinnitus and voice alteration were the only events occurring more often in the inhaled antibiotics group. The overall certainty of evidence was deemed to be low for most outcomes due to risk of bias within the trials and imprecision due to low event rates. Different antibiotics or regimens compared Of the eight trials comparing different inhaled antibiotics or different antibiotic regimens, there was only one trial for each unique comparison. We found no differences between groups for any outcomes except for the following. Aztreonam lysine for inhalation probably improved forced expiratory volume at one second (FEV) % predicted compared to tobramycin (MD -3.40%, 95% CI -6.63 to -0.17; 1 trial, 273 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, the method of defining the endpoint was different to the remaining trials and the participants were exposed to tobramycin for a long period making interpretation of the results problematic. We found no differences in any measure of lung function in the remaining comparisons. Trials measured pulmonary exacerbations in different ways and showed no differences between groups except for aztreonam lysine probably leading to fewer people needing treatment with additional antibiotics than with tobramycin (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.86; 1 trial, 273 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and there were fewer hospitalisations due to respiratory exacerbations with levofloxacin compared to tobramycin (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.98; 1 trial, 282 participants; high-certainty evidence). Important treatment-related adverse events were not very common across comparisons, but were reported less often in the tobramycin group compared to both aztreonam lysine and colistimethate. We found the certainty of evidence for these comparisons to be directly related to the risk of bias within the individual trials and varied from low to high.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Long-term treatment with inhaled anti-pseudomonal antibiotics probably improves lung function and reduces exacerbation rates, but pooled estimates of the level of benefit were very limited. The best evidence available is for inhaled tobramycin. More evidence from trials measuring similar outcomes in the same way is needed to determine a better measure of benefit. Longer-term trials are needed to look at the effect of inhaled antibiotics on quality of life, survival and nutritional outcomes.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Middle Aged; Young Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Aztreonam; Cystic Fibrosis; Lysine; Quality of Life; Tobramycin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36373968
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001021.pub4 -
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 Microbiology 2022Carbapenems are the last-line therapy for multidrug-resistant (MDR) infections caused by including those caused by species. However, the recent emergence of...
BACKGROUND
Carbapenems are the last-line therapy for multidrug-resistant (MDR) infections caused by including those caused by species. However, the recent emergence of carbapenem-resistant (CR) and extended-spectrum -lactamase (ESBL)-producing pathogens, which are resistant to nearly all antibiotics, has raised concerns among international healthcare organizations. Hence, because there is no comprehensive data in Iran, the current study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of antibiotic resistance among species, especially CR and ESBL-producing strains, in Iran.
METHODS
The literature search was performed up to June 21, 2021, in national and international databases using MeSH-extracted keywords, i.e., , antibiotic resistance, carbapenem, ESBL, and Iran. Study selection was done based on the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data analysis was carried out using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software.
RESULTS
The pooled prevalence of species resistant to various antibiotics is as follows: imipenem 16.6%, meropenem 16.2%, aztreonam 40.9%, ciprofloxacin 35.3%, norfloxacin 31%, levofloxacin 48%, gentamicin 42.1%, amikacin 30.3%, tobramycin 37.2%, tetracycline 50.1%, chloramphenicol 25.7%, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole 52%, nalidixic acid 49.1%, nitrofurantoin 43%, ceftriaxone 49.3%, cefixime 52.4%, cefotaxime 52.7%, ceftazidime 47.9%, cefepime 43.6%, and ceftizoxime 45.5%. The prevalence rates of MDR and ESBL-producing species in Iran were 63.1% and 32.8%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
In accordance with the warning of international organizations, our results revealed a high prevalence of ESBL-producing species in Iran, which is probably associated with the high prevalence of species resistant to most of the assessed antibiotics, especially MDR strains. However, the resistance rate to carbapenems was relatively low, and these drugs can still be considered as drugs of choice for the treatment of infections in Iran. Nevertheless, continuous monitoring of drug resistance along with antibiotic therapy based on the local data and evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy of new antibiotics or combination therapeutic strategies, such as ceftazidime/avibactam, meropenem/vaborbactam, plazomicin, and eravacycline, is recommended.
PubMed: 36312785
DOI: 10.1155/2022/8367365