-
Tropical Medicine & International... Jun 2024Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent brucellosis after accidental exposure to Brucella is an important topic in public health. This study aimed to systematically review the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent brucellosis after accidental exposure to Brucella is an important topic in public health. This study aimed to systematically review the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis following accidental exposure to Brucella in preventing human brucellosis disease.
METHODS
The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023456812). The outcomes included the incidence of brucellosis disease, adverse events rate, and antibiotic prophylaxis adherence. A comprehensive literature search, conducted until 20 November, 2023, involved Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases. Descriptive analysis and meta-analysis using R software were performed, risk of bias was assessed using JBI Critical appraisal tools, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool.
RESULTS
Among 3102 initially identified records, eight studies involving 97 individuals accidentally exposed, all focused on high-risk accidental exposure to Brucella in laboratory settings, were included in the review. All studies reported the prophylactic treatment comprising doxycycline at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily, combined with rifampicin at 600 mg, both administered over 21 days. Prophylaxis adherence was reported in 86% of cases, and incidence of brucellosis post-treatment was 0.01. Adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, occurred in 26% of cases. Critical appraisal revealed limitations in reporting demographics and clinical information. The certainty of evidence was rated as 'very low,' emphasising the need for caution in interpreting the observed outcomes due to study design constraints and the absence of comparative groups.
CONCLUSIONS
PEP is an alternative practice reported in the literature, used in accidents with high-risk exposure to Brucella. The currently available evidence of the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis is insufficient to support a recommendation for or against the widespread use of antibiotic prophylaxis, so caution is needed in interpreting results due to the very low certainty of evidence, primarily stemming from case series and lack of comparative groups.
Topics: Brucellosis; Humans; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Doxycycline; Rifampin; Brucella
PubMed: 38648858
DOI: 10.1111/tmi.13992 -
Systematic Reviews Apr 2024Leptospirosis, an important zoonotic bacterial disease, commonly affects resource-poor populations and results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis, an important zoonotic bacterial disease, commonly affects resource-poor populations and results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The value of antibiotics in leptospirosis remains unclear, as evidenced by the conflicting opinions published.
METHODS
We conducted a search in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies. These studies included clinical trials and retrospective studies that evaluated the efficacy or safety of antibiotics for leptospirosis treatment. The primary outcomes assessed were defervescence time, mortality rate, and hospital stays. Subgroup analyses were performed based on whether there were cases involving children and whether there were cases of severe jaundice. Safety was defined as the prevalence of adverse events associated with the use of antibiotics. p scores were utilized to rank the efficacy of the antibiotics.
RESULTS
There are included 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 control trial (CT), and 3 retrospective studies (RS) involving 920 patients and 8 antibiotics. Six antibiotics resulted in significantly shorter defervescence times compared to the control, namely cefotaxime (MD, - 1.88; 95% CI = - 2.60 to - 1.15), azithromycin (MD, - 1.74; 95% CI = - 2.52 to - 0.95), doxycycline (MD, - 1.53; 95% CI = - 2.05 to - 1.00), ceftriaxone (MD, - 1.22; 95% CI = - 1.89 to - 0.55), penicillin (MD, - 1.22; 95% CI = - 1.80 to - 0.64), and penicillin or ampicillin (MD, - 0.08; 95% CI = - 1.01 to - 0.59). The antibiotics were not effective in reducing the mortality and hospital stays. Common adverse reactions to antibiotics included Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction, rash, headache, and digestive reactions (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and others).
CONCLUSIONS
Findings recommend that leptospirosis patients be treated with antibiotics, which significantly reduced the leptospirosis defervescence time. Cephalosporins, doxycycline, and penicillin are suggested, and azithromycin may be a suitable alternative for drug-resistant cases.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42022354938.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Doxycycline; Leptospirosis; Network Meta-Analysis; Penicillins
PubMed: 38627798
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02519-y -
Open Forum Infectious Diseases Apr 2024Penicillin's long-standing role as the reference standard in syphilis treatment has led to global reliance. However, this dependence presents challenges, prompting the...
BACKGROUND
Penicillin's long-standing role as the reference standard in syphilis treatment has led to global reliance. However, this dependence presents challenges, prompting the need for alternative strategies. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of these alternative treatments against nonneurological syphilis.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception to 28 August 2023, and we included studies that compared penicillin or amoxicillin monotherapy to other treatments for the management of nonneurological syphilis. Our primary outcome was serological cure rates. Random-effect models were used to obtain pooled mean differences, and heterogeneity was assessed using the test.
RESULTS
Of 6478 screened studies, 27 met the inclusion criteria, summing 6710 patients. The studies were considerably homogeneous, and stratified analyses considering each alternative treatment separately revealed that penicillin monotherapy did not outperform ceftriaxone (pooled odds ratio, 1.66 [95% confidence interval, .97-2.84]; = 0%), azithromycin (0.92; [.73-1.18]; = 0%), or doxycycline (0.82 [.61-1.10]; = 1%) monotherapies with respect to serological conversion.
CONCLUSIONS
Alternative treatment strategies have serological cure rates equivalent to penicillin, potentially reducing global dependence on this antibiotic.
PubMed: 38595955
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofae142 -
Lupus Jun 2024Drug-induced lupus erythematosus (DILE) is the development of lupus-like syndrome following a drug exposure. DILE has been reported less frequently among children than... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Drug-induced lupus erythematosus (DILE) is the development of lupus-like syndrome following a drug exposure. DILE has been reported less frequently among children than adults.
METHODS
In this study, we present four children with DILE and similar published cases through a systematic literature review.
RESULTS
We report four children (three girls and one boy) who developed DILE associated with the use of topiramate, doxycycline, etanercept, and ethosuximide. Three of them were positive for anti-histone antibodies. In all patients, the drug was discontinued and symptoms resolved completely. The literature review revealed 48 articles describing 61 children with DILE. In the evaluation of 65 patients (our 4 patients and 61 patients from the literature), the most frequently reported drugs associated with DILE were ethosuximide ( = 13) and minocycline ( = 12). Fever ( = 33), arthralgia ( = 31), rash ( = 30), and arthritis ( = 29) were the most common clinical manifestations. Antinuclear antibody (ANA) was positive in 93.5% of patients and anti-histone antibodies were detected in 72.2% of the patients. As for treatment, the responsible drug was discontinued in all patients, and corticosteroids were initiated in 53.3%. Improvement was achieved in 92.0% of patients.
CONCLUSION
For children presenting with SLE features, proper drug history is crucial since DILE may be more frequent than anticipated. An association of the relevant drug with the symptoms, and resolution of symptoms on drug withdrawal provides evidence for the diagnosis of DILE.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Child; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic; Topiramate; Doxycycline; Ethosuximide; Adolescent; Etanercept; Minocycline; Antibodies, Antinuclear; Child, Preschool
PubMed: 38580326
DOI: 10.1177/09612033241245078 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Apr 2024There is considerable interest in the use of doxycycline post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to reduce the incidence of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs). An... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There is considerable interest in the use of doxycycline post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to reduce the incidence of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs). An important concern is that this could select for tetracycline resistance in these STIs and other species. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar, (1948-2023) for randomized controlled trials comparing tetracycline PEP with non-tetracycline controls. The primary outcome was antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to tetracyclines in all bacterial species with available data. Our search yielded 140 studies, of which three met the inclusion criteria. Tetracycline PEP was associated with an increasedprevalence of tetracycline resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae, but this effect was not statistically significant (Pooled OR 2.3, 95% CI 0.9-3.4). PEP had a marked effect on the N. gonorrhoeae tetracycline MIC distribution in the one study where this was assessed. Prophylactic efficacy was 100% at low MICs and 0% at high MICs. In the one study where this was assessed, PEP resulted in a significant increase in tetracycline resistance in commensal Neisseria species compared to the control group (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.5-5.5) but no significant effect on the prevalence of tetracycline resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. The available evidence suggests that PEP with tetracyclines could be associated with selecting tetracycline resistance in N. gonorrhoeae and commensal Neisseria species.
Topics: Humans; Tetracycline; Tetracycline Resistance; Post-Exposure Prophylaxis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Sexually Transmitted Diseases; Neisseria gonorrhoeae; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Tetracyclines; Mitomycin; Gonorrhea
PubMed: 38575877
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09275-3 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2024Pulmonary actinomycosis (PA) is a rare type of infection that can be challenging to diagnose since it often mimics lung cancer.
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary actinomycosis (PA) is a rare type of infection that can be challenging to diagnose since it often mimics lung cancer.
METHODS
Published case reports and case series of PA in patients with suspicion of lung cancer were considered, and data were extracted by a structured search through PubMed/Medline.
RESULTS
After analyzing Medline, 31 studies were reviewed, from which 48 cases were extracted. Europe had the highest prevalence of reported cases with 45.1%, followed by Asia (32.2%), America (19.3%), and Africa (3.2%). The average age of patients was 58.9 years, and 75% of all patients were above 50 years old. Male patients (70%) were predominantly affected by PA. The overall mortality rate was 6.25%. In only eight cases, the causative agent was reported, and was the most common isolated pathogen with three cases. Based on histopathological examination, 75% of the cases were diagnosed, and the lobectomy was performed in 10 cases, the most common surgical intervention. In 50% of the cases, the selective antibiotics were intravenous and oral penicillin, followed by amoxicillin (29.1%), amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, ampicillin, levofloxacin, and doxycycline.
CONCLUSION
The non-specific symptoms resemble lung cancer, leading to confusion between PA and cancer in imaging scans. Radiological techniques are helpful but have limitations that can lead to unnecessary surgeries when confusing PA with lung cancer. Therefore, it is important to raise awareness about the signs and symptoms of PA and lung cancer to prevent undesirable complications and ensure appropriate treatment measures are taken.
PubMed: 38523909
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1356390 -
European Archives of... Mar 2024To compare the effects of doxycycline (DOX) and conventional management in patients with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps (CRSwNP). (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To compare the effects of doxycycline (DOX) and conventional management in patients with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps (CRSwNP).
METHODS
Six databases were searched to September 2023. We retrieved studies that compared improvements in refractory chronic sinusitis-related symptoms between DOX-treated and control groups.
RESULTS
DOX significantly reduced the Lund-Kennedy (LK) score [- 0.3670 (range - 0.6173; - 0.1166); I = 92.8%], the nasal polyposis score [- 0.9484 (- 1.2287; - 0.6680); I = 92.5%], the patient-reported Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT) score [- 0.3141 (- 0.4622; - 0.1660); I = 91.2%], and the nasal obstruction score [- 0.1813 (- 0.3382; - 0.0243); I = 86.2%]. On subgroup analyses by the measurement timepoints, the extent of nasal polyposis was significantly lower in the DOX group during treatment, at the end of treatment, and 4 and 8 weeks later. The LK scores also indicated improvements during treatment and at the end of treatment. The SNOT score tended to decrease with time in the treatment group. Nasal obstruction symptoms improved during treatment and 4 weeks later.
CONCLUSION
DOX enhances the postoperative endoscopic outcomes of refractory CRSwNP patients by reducing recurrent polyposis and inflammation.
PubMed: 38512383
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-08563-7 -
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious... Jun 2024Antibiotic therapy for patients with early Lyme disease is necessary to prevent later-stage Lyme disease complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antibiotic therapy for patients with early Lyme disease is necessary to prevent later-stage Lyme disease complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares shorter versus longer antibiotic regimens in treating early Lyme disease.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted up to November 2023. We examined treatment failure, complete response, and photosensitivity. Short vs. long therapy was defined as ≤10 days vs. >10 days. Subgroup analyses included antibiotic type and varying treatment durations. Analysis utilized RStudio 4.1.2. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023423876.
RESULTS
Seven studies, encompassing 1,462 patients, were analyzed. No significant differences in treatment failure, 12-month complete response, final visit complete response were found between short and long durations of antibiotic therapy. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses corroborated these findings.
CONCLUSION
Shorter and longer antibiotic regimens for early Lyme disease show similar efficacy, highlighting the potential of ≤10-day courses, as effective treatment options.
Topics: Lyme Disease; Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Treatment Outcome; Duration of Therapy
PubMed: 38493509
DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116215 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2024Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for the management of leptospirosis. Despite the widespread use of antibiotic treatment for leptospirosis, there seems to be insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness or to recommend antibiotic use as a standard practice. This updated systematic review evaluated the available evidence regarding the use of antibiotics in treating leptospirosis, building upon a previously published Cochrane review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotics versus placebo, no intervention, or another antibiotic for the treatment of people with leptospirosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials following standard Cochrane procedures. The date of the last search was 27 March 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised clinical trials of various designs that examined the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis. We did not impose any restrictions based on the age, sex, occupation, or comorbidities of the participants involved in the trials. Our search encompassed trials that evaluated antibiotics, regardless of the method of administration, dosage, and schedule, and compared them with placebo or no intervention, or compared different antibiotics. We included trials regardless of the outcomes reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
During the preparation of this review, we adhered to the Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events (nosocomial infection). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, proportion of people with adverse events considered non-serious, and days of hospitalisation. To assess the risk of bias of the included trials, we used the RoB 2 tool, and for evaluating the certainty of evidence we used GRADEpro GDT software. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), both accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the random-effects model for all our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. For our primary outcome analyses, we included trial data from the longest follow-up period.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified nine randomised clinical trials comprising 1019 participants. Seven trials compared two intervention groups and two trials compared three intervention groups. Amongst the trials comparing antibiotics versus placebos, four trials assessed penicillin and one trial assessed doxycycline. In the trials comparing different antibiotics, one trial evaluated doxycycline versus azithromycin, one trial assessed penicillin versus doxycycline versus cefotaxime, and one trial evaluated ceftriaxone versus penicillin. One trial assessed penicillin with chloramphenicol and no intervention. Apart from two trials that recruited military personnel stationed in endemic areas or military personnel returning from training courses in endemic areas, the remaining trials recruited people from the general population presenting to the hospital with fever in an endemic area. The participants' ages in the included trials was 13 to 92 years. The treatment duration was seven days for penicillin, doxycycline, and cephalosporins; five days for chloramphenicol; and three days for azithromycin. The follow-up durations varied across trials, with three trials not specifying their follow-up periods. Three trials were excluded from quantitative synthesis; one reported zero events for a prespecified outcome, and two did not provide data for any prespecified outcomes. Antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.79; I = 8%; 3 trials, 367 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin or chloramphenicol versus placebo on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.17; I = 0%; 2 trials, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed serious adverse events. Antibiotics versus another antibiotic The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cephalosporin on all-cause mortality (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.04; I = 0%; 2 trials, 348 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus doxycycline (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.46; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cefotaxime versus doxycycline on all-cause mortality (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.78; 1 trial, 169 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus doxycycline on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.62; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or versus cefotaxime (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of doxycycline versus cefotaxime on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cefotaxime (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.47; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), versus doxycycline (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.66; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus chloramphenicol on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.67; 1 trial, 52 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Funding Six of the nine trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources and three trials did not mention funding source. Four of the six trials mentioning sources received funds from public or governmental sources or from international charitable sources, and the remaining two, in addition to public or governmental sources, received support in the form of trial drug supply directly from pharmaceutical companies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
As the certainty of evidence is very low, we do not know if antibiotics provide little to no effect on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or adverse events considered non-serious. There is a lack of definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis infection, and the absence of trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes further adds to this limitation.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Doxycycline; Azithromycin; Quality of Life; Chloramphenicol; Penicillins; Cephalosporins; Cefotaxime; Leptospirosis; Cross Infection
PubMed: 38483092
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014960.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2024Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in particular in travellers and high-risk groups. However, the clinical benefits are unknown, especially when considering possible treatment-associated adverse effects. This review assesses the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in leptospirosis and is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Library (2009, Issue 3).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotic prophylaxis for human leptospirosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and other resources. We searched online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The last date of search was 17 April 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised clinical trials of any trial design, assessing antibiotics for prevention of leptospirosis, and with no restrictions on age, sex, occupation, or comorbidity of trial participants. We looked for trials assessing antibiotics irrespective of route of administration, dosage, and schedule versus placebo or no intervention. We also included trials assessing antibiotics versus other antibiotics using these criteria, or the same antibiotic but with another dose or schedule.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed Cochrane methodology. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (inclusive of asymptomatic cases), clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation, clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (exclusive of asymptomatic cases), and serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were quality of life and the proportion of people with non-serious adverse events. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using the RoB 2 tool and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a random-effects model for our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. Our primary outcome analyses included trial data at the longest follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five randomised clinical trials comprising 2593 participants that compared antibiotics (doxycycline, azithromycin, or penicillin) with placebo, or one antibiotic compared with another. Four trials assessed doxycycline with different durations, one trial assessed azithromycin, and one trial assessed penicillin. One trial had three intervention groups: doxycycline, azithromycin, and placebo. Three trials assessed pre-exposure prophylaxis, one trial assessed postexposure prophylaxis, and one did not report this clearly. Four trials recruited residents in endemic areas, and one trial recruited soldiers who experienced limited time exposure. The participants' ages in the included trials were 10 to 80 years. Follow-up ranged from one to three months. Antibiotics versus placebo Doxycycline compared with placebo may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.83; 1 trial, 782 participants; low-certainty evidence). Prophylactic antibiotics may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.26; 5 trials, 2593 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may result in little to no difference in the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of laboratory confirmation (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.08; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis with laboratory confirmation (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.26; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics compared with placebo may increase non-serious adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 10.13, 95% CI 2.40 to 42.71; 3 trials, 1909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One antibiotic versus another antibiotic One trial assessed doxycycline versus azithromycin but did not report mortality. Compared to azithromycin, doxycycline may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.32; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), and on non-serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.48; 1 trial, 137 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. None of the five included trials reported serious adverse events or assessed quality of life. One study is awaiting classification. Funding Four of the five trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources, and the remaining trial did not include this. Three of the four trials that disclosed their supporting sources received the supply of trial drugs directly from the same pharmaceutical company, and the remaining trial received financial support from a governmental source.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo or another antibiotic has little or have no effect on all-cause mortality or leptospirosis infection because the certainty of evidence is low or very low. We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo may increase the overall risk of non-serious adverse events because of very low-certainty evidence. We lack definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for the prophylaxis of leptospirosis infection. We lack trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Doxycycline; Azithromycin; Quality of Life; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Penicillins; Leptospirosis
PubMed: 38483067
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014959.pub2