-
Preventive Veterinary Medicine Jan 2022Salmonella contamination of livestock feed is a serious veterinary and public health issue. In this study we used a systematic review to assess the prevalence and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Salmonella contamination of livestock feed is a serious veterinary and public health issue. In this study we used a systematic review to assess the prevalence and characterization of Salmonella isolates detected in raw feed components, feed milling equipment and finished feed from 97 studies published from 1955 to 2020 across seven global regions. Eighty-five studies were included in a meta-analyses to estimate the combined prevalence of Salmonella detection and to compare the risk of contamination associated with different sample types. We found the overall combined prevalence estimate of Salmonella detection was 0.14 with a prevalence of 0.18 in raw feed components, 0.09 in finished feed and 0.08 in feed milling equipment. Animal based raw feed components were 3.9 times more likely to be contaminated with Salmonella than plant based raw feed components. Differences between studies accounted for 99 % of the variance in the prevalence estimate for all sample types and there was no effect of region on the prevalence estimates. The combined prevalence of Salmonella detection in raw feed components decreased from 0.25 in 1955 to 0.11 in 2019. The proportion of Salmonella isolates that were resistant to antimicrobials was largest for amikacin (0.20), tetracycline (0.18) streptomycin (0.17), cefotaxime (0.14) and sulfisoxazole (0.11). The prevalence of Salmonella contamination of animal feed varies widely between individual studies and is an ongoing challenge for the commercial feed industry. Control relies on the vigilant monitoring and control of Salmonella in each individual mill.
Topics: Animal Feed; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Food Microbiology; Livestock; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Prevalence; Salmonella; Salmonella Infections, Animal
PubMed: 34826732
DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2021.105546 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review last published in 2013. Long-term central venous catheters (CVCs), including tunnelled CVCs (TCVCs) and totally... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review last published in 2013. Long-term central venous catheters (CVCs), including tunnelled CVCs (TCVCs) and totally implanted devices or ports (TIDs), are increasingly used when treating people with cancer. Despite international guidelines on sterile insertion and appropriate CVC maintenance and use, infections remain a common complication. These infections are mainly caused by gram-positive bacteria. Antimicrobial prevention strategies aimed at these micro-organisms could potentially decrease the majority of CVC-related infections. The aim of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics for the prevention of gram-positive infections in people with cancer who have long-term CVCs.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of administering antibiotics prior to the insertion of long-term CVCs or as a flush/lock solution, or both during long-term CVC access to prevent gram-positive CVC-related infections in adults and children receiving treatment for cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
The search for this updated review was conducted on 19 November 2020. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid and Embase via Ovid. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform portal for additional articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared either the administration of prophylactic antibiotics prior to long-term CVC insertion versus no administration of antibiotics, or the use of an antibiotic versus a non-antibiotic flush/lock solution in long-term CVCs, in adults and children receiving treatment for cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently selected studies, classified them and extracted data onto a predesigned data collection form. The outcomes of interest were gram-positive catheter-related infection events and total number of CVCs and CVC days. We pooled the data using a random-effects model for meta-analyses. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we identified 310 potentially relevant studies and screened them for eligibility. We included one additional RCT with 404 participants. The original review included 11 RCTs with a total of 840 people with cancer (adults and children). In total this review included 12 RCTs with 1244 participants. Antibiotics prior to insertion of the CVC Six trials compared the use of antibiotics (vancomycin, teicoplanin, ceftazidime or cefazolin) versus no antibiotics given before the insertion of a long-term CVC. One study did not observe any CVC-related infection events in either group was not included in the quantitative analysis as it was not possible to calculate a risk ratio. Administering an antibiotic prior to insertion of the CVC may not reduce gram-positive CVC-related infections (pooled risk ratio 0.67, confidence interval (CI) 95% 0.32 to 1.43; control versus intervention group risk 10.4% versus 7.3% of the participants; 5 studies, 648 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We sought adverse event data, but these were not described by the authors. The overall risk of bias was deemed low. Antibiotics as a flushing or locking solution Six trials compared a combined antibiotic (vancomycin, amikacin or taurolidine) and heparin solution with a heparin-only solution for flushing or locking the long-term CVC after use. One study did not observe any CRS events and was not include this study in the quantitative analysis as it was not possible to calculate a risk ratio. Flushing and locking long-term CVCs with a combined antibiotic and heparin solution likely reduced the risk of gram-positive CVC-related infections compared to a heparin-only solution (pooled rate ratio 0.47, CI 95% 0.26 to 0.85; control versus intervention group rate ratio 0.66 versus 0.27 per 1000 CVC-days; 5 studies, 443 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial reported a higher incidence of occlusions and participants in one trial reported an unpleasant taste after flushing associated with a combined antibiotic and heparin solution. The overall risk of bias was deemed low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, we included one additional study. There was no observed benefit of administering antibiotics before the insertion of long-term CVCs to prevent gram-positive CVC-related infections. Flushing or locking long-term CVCs with an antibiotic solution likely reduces gram-positive CVC-related infections experienced in people at risk of neutropenia through chemotherapy or disease. However, a limitation of this review is heterogeneity between the studies for both outcomes. Insufficient data were available to evaluate if the conclusions apply equally for different CVC types and for adults versus children. It must be noted that the use of an antibiotic flush/lock solution may increase microbial antibiotic resistance, therefore it should be reserved for high-risk people or if the baseline CVC-related infection rates are high. Further research is needed to identify high-risk groups most likely to benefit from these antibiotic flush/lock solutions.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Catheter-Related Infections; Central Venous Catheters; Child; Heparin; Humans; Neoplasms
PubMed: 34617602
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003295.pub4 -
Access Microbiology Mar 2021The rapid spread of resistance among extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing is a serious problem around the world. It results in serious clinical complications... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The rapid spread of resistance among extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing is a serious problem around the world. It results in serious clinical complications in humans and has become a global threat. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of ESBL-producing in different clinical samples in Ethiopia.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. All identified observational studies reporting the prevalence of ESBL-producing from clinical samples in Ethiopia were included. Four authors independently extracted data and analysed using R software version 3.6.1 and STATA statistical software version 13. A random-effects model was computed to estimate the pooled prevalence of ESBL-producing in Ethiopia.
RESULTS
Of 142 articles reviewed, 14 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of ESBL-producing in the different clinical specimens in Ethiopia was 49 % (95 % CI: 39, 60). was the leading ESBL-producing followed by and with a prevalence of 74, 67 and 60 %, respectively. ESBL-producing isolates showed a high rate of resistance to cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, Amoxicillin clavulanic acid (AMC), ampicillin and aztreonam. The better options for the treatment of ESBL-producing are amikacin and Imipenem.
CONCLUSION
The magnitude of ESBL-producing in different clinical samples in Ethiopia is alarmingly high and represents a threat to human health. Hence, a coordinated effort needs to be implemented for the prevention and control of these .
PubMed: 34151151
DOI: 10.1099/acmi.0.000195 -
Iranian Journal of Basic Medical... Apr 2021This updated systematic review and meta-analysis follows two aims: 1) to assess antibiotic resistance in Iran from 2013 to 2020 and, 2) to assess the trend of... (Review)
Review
This updated systematic review and meta-analysis follows two aims: 1) to assess antibiotic resistance in Iran from 2013 to 2020 and, 2) to assess the trend of resistance from 1999 to 2020. Several national and international databases were systematically searched through MeSH extracted keywords to identify 41 published studies addressing drug-resistant in Iran. Meta-analysis was done based on the PRISMA protocols using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. The average prevalence of resistance to first- and second-line anti-TB drugs, multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) in new and previously treated tuberculosis (TB) cases in Iran during 2013-2020 were as follows: isoniazid 6.9%, rifampin 7.9%, ethambutol 5.7%, pyrazinamide 20.4%, -aminosalicylic acid 4.6%, capreomycin 1.7%, cycloserine 1.8%, ethionamide 11.3%, ofloxacin 1.5%, kanamycin 3.8%, amikacin 2.2%, MDR-TB 6.3% and XDR-TB 0.9%. Based on the presented data, resistance to first- and second-line anti-TB drugs, as well as MDR-TB, was low during 2013-2020 in Iran. Furthermore, there was a declining trend in TB drug resistance from 1999 to 2020. Hence, to maintain the current decreasing trend and to control and eliminate TB infection in Iran, continuous monitoring of resistance patterns is recommended.
PubMed: 34094023
DOI: 10.22038/IJBMS.2021.48628.11161 -
The Journal of Infection Jul 2021Objectives estimate the prevalence of ototoxic hearing loss in drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) patients treated with aminoglycoside antibiotics via a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Objectives estimate the prevalence of ototoxic hearing loss in drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) patients treated with aminoglycoside antibiotics via a systematic review and meta-analysis. Estimate the annual preventable cases of hearing loss in DR-TB patients and leverage findings to discuss primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. Methods studies published between 2005 and 2018 that reported prevalence of post-treatment hearing loss in DR-TB patients were included. We performed a random effects meta-analysis to determine pooled prevalence of ototoxic hearing loss overall and by medication type. Preventable hearing loss cases were estimated using World Health Organization (WHO) data on DR-TB treatment and prevalence determined by the meta-analysis. Results eighteen studies from 10 countries were included. Pooled prevalence of ototoxic hearing loss and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was 40.62% CI [32.77- 66.61%] for all drugs (kanamycin: 49.65% CI [32.77- 66.61%], amikacin: 38.93% CI [26.44-53.07%], capreomycin: 10.21% CI [4.33-22.21%]). Non-use of aminoglycosides may result in prevention of approximately 50,000 hearing loss cases annually. Conclusions aminoglycoside use results in high prevalence of ototoxic hearing loss. Widespread prevention of hearing loss can be achieved by following updated WHO guidelines for DR-TB treatment. When hearing loss cannot be avoided, secondary and tertiary prevention should be prioritized.
Topics: Aminoglycosides; Antitubercular Agents; Hearing Loss; Humans; Prevalence; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant
PubMed: 34015383
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.05.010 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality....
BACKGROUND
Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality. Despite the high burden of neonatal sepsis, high-quality evidence in diagnosis and treatment is scarce. Possibly due to the diagnostic challenges of sepsis and the relative immunosuppression of the newborn, many neonates receive antibiotics for suspected sepsis. Antibiotics have become the most used therapeutics in neonatal intensive care units. The last Cochrane Review was updated in 2004. Given the clinical importance, an updated systematic review assessing the effects of different antibiotic regimens for early-onset neonatal sepsis is needed.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of different antibiotic regimens for early-onset neonatal sepsis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL (2020, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase Ovid; CINAHL; LILACS; Science Citation Index EXPANDED and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on 12 March 2021. We searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing different antibiotic regimens for early-onset neonatal sepsis. We included participants from birth to 72 hours of life at randomisation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and our secondary outcomes were: serious adverse events, respiratory support, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, necrotising enterocolitis, and ototoxicity. Our primary time point of interest was at maximum follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five RCTs (865 participants). All trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence according to GRADE was very low. The included trials assessed five different comparisons of antibiotics. We did not conduct any meta-analyses due to lack of relevant data. Of the five included trials one trial compared ampicillin plus gentamicin with benzylpenicillin plus gentamicin; one trial compared piperacillin plus tazobactam with amikacin; one trial compared ticarcillin plus clavulanic acid with piperacillin plus gentamicin; one trial compared piperacillin with ampicillin plus amikacin; and one trial compared ceftazidime with benzylpenicillin plus gentamicin. None of the five comparisons found any evidence of a difference when assessing all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, or necrotising enterocolitis; however, none of the trials were near an information size that could contribute significantly to the evidence of the comparative benefits and risks of any particular antibiotic regimen. None of the trials assessed respiratory support or ototoxicity. The benefits and harms of different antibiotic regimens remain unclear due to the lack of well-powered trials and the high risk of systematic errors.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is insufficient to support any antibiotic regimen being superior to another. Large RCTs assessing different antibiotic regimens in early-onset neonatal sepsis with low risk of bias are warranted.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bias; Cause of Death; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Sepsis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33998666
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013837.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality....
BACKGROUND
Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality. Despite the high burden of neonatal sepsis, high-quality evidence in diagnosis and treatment is scarce. Due to the diagnostic challenges of sepsis and the relative immunosuppression of the newborn, many neonates receive antibiotics for suspected sepsis. Antibiotics have become the most used therapeutics in neonatal intensive care units, and observational studies in high-income countries suggest that 83% to 94% of newborns treated with antibiotics for suspected sepsis have negative blood cultures. The last Cochrane Review was updated in 2005. There is a need for an updated systematic review assessing the effects of different antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of different antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL (2021, Issue 3); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase Ovid; CINAHL; LILACS; Science Citation Index EXPANDED and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on 12 March 2021. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing different antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis. We included participants older than 72 hours of life at randomisation, suspected or diagnosed with neonatal sepsis, meningitis, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, or necrotising enterocolitis. We excluded trials that assessed treatment of fungal infections.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and our secondary outcomes were: serious adverse events, respiratory support, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, necrotising enterocolitis, and ototoxicity. Our primary time point of interest was at maximum follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five RCTs (580 participants). All trials were at high risk of bias, and had very low-certainty evidence. The five included trials assessed five different comparisons of antibiotics. We did not conduct a meta-analysis due to lack of relevant data. Of the five included trials one trial compared cefazolin plus amikacin with vancomycin plus amikacin; one trial compared ticarcillin plus clavulanic acid with flucloxacillin plus gentamicin; one trial compared cloxacillin plus amikacin with cefotaxime plus gentamicin; one trial compared meropenem with standard care (ampicillin plus gentamicin or cefotaxime plus gentamicin); and one trial compared vancomycin plus gentamicin with vancomycin plus aztreonam. None of the five comparisons found any evidence of a difference when assessing all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, or necrotising enterocolitis; however, none of the trials were near an information size that could contribute significantly to the evidence of the comparative benefits and risks of any particular antibiotic regimen. None of the trials assessed respiratory support or ototoxicity. The benefits and harms of different antibiotic regimens remain unclear due to the lack of well-powered trials and the high risk of systematic errors.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is insufficient to support any antibiotic regimen being superior to another. RCTs assessing different antibiotic regimens in late-onset neonatal sepsis with low risks of bias are warranted.
Topics: Amikacin; Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Aztreonam; Bias; Cefazolin; Clavulanic Acid; Drug Therapy, Combination; Floxacillin; Gentamicins; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Sepsis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ticarcillin; Vancomycin
PubMed: 33998665
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013836.pub2 -
International Journal of Antimicrobial... May 2021The superiority of combination therapy for carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB) infections remains controversial. In vitro models may predict the efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The superiority of combination therapy for carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB) infections remains controversial. In vitro models may predict the efficacy of antibiotic regimens against CR-GNB. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed including pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) and time-kill (TK) studies examining the in vitro efficacy of antibiotic combinations against CR-GNB [PROSPERO registration no. CRD42019128104]. The primary outcome was in vitro synergy based on the effect size (ES): high, ES ≥ 0.75, moderate, 0.35 < ES < 0.75; low, ES ≤ 0.35; and absent, ES = 0). A network meta-analysis assessed the bactericidal effect and re-growth rate (secondary outcomes). An adapted version of the ToxRTool was used for risk-of-bias assessment. Over 180 combination regimens from 136 studies were included. The most frequently analysed classes were polymyxins and carbapenems. Limited data were available for ceftazidime/avibactam, ceftolozane/tazobactam and imipenem/relebactam. High or moderate synergism was shown for polymyxin/rifampicin against Acinetobacter baumannii [ES = 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-1.00], polymyxin/fosfomycin against Klebsiella pneumoniae (ES = 1.00, 95% CI 0.66-1.00) and imipenem/amikacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ES = 1.00, 95% CI 0.21-1.00). Compared with monotherapy, increased bactericidal activity and lower re-growth rates were reported for colistin/fosfomycin and polymyxin/rifampicin in K. pneumoniae and for imipenem/amikacin or imipenem/tobramycin against P. aeruginosa. High quality was documented for 65% and 53% of PK/PD and TK studies, respectively. Well-designed in vitro studies should be encouraged to guide the selection of combination therapies in clinical trials and to improve the armamentarium against carbapenem-resistant bacteria.
Topics: Amikacin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azabicyclo Compounds; Carbapenems; Ceftazidime; Cephalosporins; Colistin; Drug Combinations; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Drug Synergism; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fosfomycin; Gram-Negative Bacteria; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections; Humans; Imipenem; In Vitro Techniques; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Polymyxins; Rifampin; Tazobactam; Tobramycin
PubMed: 33857539
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106344 -
Scientific Reports Mar 2021Treatment of ventilated patients with gram-negative pneumonia (GNP) is often unsuccessful. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of nebulized amikacin (NA) as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Amikacin nebulization for the adjunctive therapy of gram-negative pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Treatment of ventilated patients with gram-negative pneumonia (GNP) is often unsuccessful. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of nebulized amikacin (NA) as adjunctive therapy to systemic antibiotics in this patient population. PubMed, Embase, China national knowledge infrastructure, Wanfang, and the Cochrane database were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of NA as adjunctive therapy in ventilated adult patients with GNP. Heterogeneity was explored using subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis. The Grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Thirteen RCTs with 1733 adults were included. The pooled results showed NA had better microbiologic eradication (RR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.69, P < 0.0001) and improved clinical response (RR = 1.23; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.34; P < 0.0001) when compared with control. Meanwhile, overall mortality, pneumonia associated mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in ICU and change of clinical pneumonia infection scores were similar between NA and control groups. Additionally, NA did not add significant nephrotoxicity while could cause more bronchospasm. The use of NA adjunctive to systemic antibiotics therapy showed better benefits in ventilated patients with GNP. More well-designed RCTs are still needed to confirm our results.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Amikacin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Critical Care; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Middle Aged; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Respiration, Artificial; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33772055
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-86342-8 -
Medicine Feb 2021Meropenem monotherapy vs ceftazidime plus amikacin have been approved for use against febrile neutropenia. To assess the effectiveness and safety of them for empirical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Meropenem monotherapy vs ceftazidime plus amikacin have been approved for use against febrile neutropenia. To assess the effectiveness and safety of them for empirical treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials on ceftazidime plus amikacin, or/and monotherapy with meropenem for the treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia were identified by searching Cochrane Library, PubMed, Science Direct, Wiley Online, Science Citation Index, Google (scholar), National Center for Biotechnology Information, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Data on interventions, participants' characteristics and the outcomes of therapy, were extracted for statistical analysis. Seven trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria.
RESULT
The treatment with ceftazidime plus amikacin was more effective than meropenem (OR = 1.17; 95% CI 0.93-1.46; 1270 participants). However, the treatment effects of the 2 therapy methods were almost parallel in adults (OR = 1.15; 95% CI 0.91-1.46; 1130 participants older than 16). Drug-related adverse effects afflicted more patients treated with ceftazidime plus amikacin (OR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.52-1.15; 1445 participants). The common responses were nausea, diarrhea, rash, and increased in serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase, serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase and bilirubin.
CONCLUSION
Ceftazidime plus amikacin should be the first choice for empirical treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia, and meropenem may be chosen as a last defense against pathogenic bacteria.
Topics: Amikacin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Ceftazidime; Drug Therapy, Combination; Febrile Neutropenia; Humans; Meropenem; Neoplasms
PubMed: 33663117
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024883