-
BMC Oral Health Feb 2016The treatment of periodontitis begins with a non-surgical phase that includes scaling and root planing(SRP) and on occasion the use of systemic antibiotics. The goal was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The treatment of periodontitis begins with a non-surgical phase that includes scaling and root planing(SRP) and on occasion the use of systemic antibiotics. The goal was to systematically evaluate in systemic healthy adults the effect of the concomitant administration of amoxicillin (amx) and metronidazole (met) adjunctive to SRP compared to SRP alone.
METHODS
The PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL and EMBASE databases were searched up to November 2014 to identify appropriate studies. Probing Pocket Depth (PD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), Bleeding on Pocket Probing(BOP) and Plaque Indices(PI) were selected as outcome variables. Based on the extracted data a meta-analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
A total of 526 unique articles were found, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis showed that SRP + amx + met provided significantly better effects overall and more pronounced PD reduction in periodontal pockets initially measuring ≥6 mm (DiffM:-0.86 mm, p < 0.00001) and gain in CAL(DiffM:+0.75 mm, p = 0.0001). The meta-analysis for the secondary inflammatory parameter BOP showed that SRP + amx + met provided full mouth significantly greater reduction in BOP than SRP alone (DiffM:-6.98 %, p = 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Adjunctive systemic amoxicillin and metronidazole medication to SRP significantly improved the clinical outcomes with respect to mean PD, CAL and BOP compared to SRP alone. There is moderate to strong evidence in support of the recommendation that adjunctive amx + met therapy to SRP significantly improves the clinical outcomes, with respect to mean PD and CAL compared to SRP alone especially in initially deep (≥6 mm) pockets. No major side effects associated with the intake of amx + met were reported. This treatment regimen is an efficacious, minimally invasive, practical and inexpensive approach for periodontitis therapy. The key components are mechanical tooth and pocket debridement, supportive treatment of the disease with systemic antibiotics and attention to proper self-care.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dental Scaling; Humans; Metronidazole; Periodontal Pocket; Periodontitis; Root Planing; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26928597
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-015-0123-6 -
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis study sought to review the efficacy of amoxicillin/metronidazole dose and duration time in the treatment of stage II - III grade... (Review)
Review
Amoxicillin/Metronidazole Dose Impact as an Adjunctive Therapy for Stage II - III Grade C Periodontitis (Aggressive Periodontitis) at 3- And 6-Month Follow-Ups: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review and meta-analysis study sought to review the efficacy of amoxicillin/metronidazole dose and duration time in the treatment of stage II - III grade C periodontitis (aggressive periodontitis) after current follow-up.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search of the literature was performed in three main databases for relevant articles published until 31 of December 2021. According to the PRISMA statement, the extracted data from selected articles were pooled. The weighted mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of clinical attachment level (CAL) gain and probing depth (PD) reduction at 3 and 6 months of follow-up were calculated. The heterogeneity of the data was evaluated by the I test.
RESULTS
The results of six randomized clinical trials revealed significant improvement of clinical parameters in moderate and severe pockets. Prescription of 400 to 500 mg metronidazole caused significant CAL gain changes just in moderate pockets (MD = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.53; P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Amoxicillin/metronidazole has positive short-term effects as an adjunct to scaling and root planning for treatment of stage II - III grade C periodontitis. Higher doses of metronidazole (400 to 500 mg) are required for optimal efficacy regarding clinical attachment level gain.
PubMed: 35574209
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2022.13102 -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Apr 2021Resistance, prolonged therapy, and more adverse reactions made amoxicillin less preferred for treating otitis media. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Resistance, prolonged therapy, and more adverse reactions made amoxicillin less preferred for treating otitis media. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of azithromycin and amoxicillin/clavulanate for the treatment of otitis media in children.
METHODOLOGY
This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched. Comparative randomized clinical trial studies between azithromycin and amoxicillin/clavulanate to treat otitis media in children published up to 30 September 2019 were included. The risk of bias was assessed and Data was extracted by the first author and checked by the second author. Meta-analysis was performed by STATA software version 16, and Mantel-Haenszel statistical method with effect measure odds ratio was employed for analysis.
RESULT
751 records were identified and 14 studies were eligible for analysis. In 12 studies azithromycin had equivalent clinical efficacy and 2 had less to amoxicillin/clavulanate. Meta-analysis results showed no statistically significant difference in efficacy in favor of amoxicillin/clavulanate after completion of treatment OR 0.75, 95% CI (0.62-0.91). On subgroup analysis for children less than 2 years (OR 0.96 95% CI (0.49-2.29), and greater than 2 years (OR 1.40 95% CI (0.93-2.11) and also efficacy on follow up (OR 0.97 95% CI (0.83-1.15) there is no statistically significant difference. The clinical adverse events are more in the amoxicillin/clavulanate group than in the azithromycin with a statistical significant difference OR 0.46 95% CI (0.43-0.56).
CONCLUSION
Azithromycin is comparable to amoxicillin/clavulanate to treat otitis media in children, and it is safer and more tolerable.
Topics: Adolescent; Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Biomarkers, Pharmacological; Child; Child, Preschool; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Monitoring; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Infant; Male; Otitis Media; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33894769
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-021-00434-x -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Mar 2024() infects over half the global population, causing gastrointestinal diseases like dyspepsia, gastritis, duodenitis, peptic ulcers, G-MALT lymphoma, and gastric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
() infects over half the global population, causing gastrointestinal diseases like dyspepsia, gastritis, duodenitis, peptic ulcers, G-MALT lymphoma, and gastric adenocarcinoma. Eradicating is crucial for treating and preventing these conditions. While conventional proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy is effective, there's growing interest in longer acid suppression therapies. Potassium competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) triple and dual therapy are new regimens for eradication. Initially used in Asian populations, vonoprazan (VPZ) has been recently Food and Drug Administration-approved for eradication.
AIM
To assess the efficacy of regimens containing P-CABs in eradicating infection.
METHODS
This study, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching MEDLINE and Scopus libraries for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or observational studies with the following command: [("" OR "H pylori") AND ("Treatment" OR "Therapy" OR "Eradication") AND ("Vonaprazan" OR "Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker" OR "P-CAB" OR "PCAB" OR "Revaprazan" OR "Linaprazan" OR "Soraprazan" OR "Tegoprazan")]. Studies comparing the efficacy of P-CABs-based treatment to classical PPIs in eradicating were included. Exclusion criteria included case reports, case series, unpublished trials, or conference abstracts. Data variables encompassed age, diagnosis method, sample sizes, study duration, intervention and control, and eradication method were gathered by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed in R software, and forest plots were generated.
RESULTS
A total of 256 references were initially retrieved through the search command. Ultimately, fifteen studies (7 RCTs, 7 retrospective observational studies, and 1 comparative unique study) were included, comparing P-CAB triple therapy to PPI triple therapy. The intention-to-treat analysis involved 8049 patients, with 4471 in the P-CAB intervention group and 3578 in the PPI control group across these studies. The analysis revealed a significant difference in eradication between VPZ triple therapy and PPI triple therapy in both RCTs and observational studies [risk ratio (RR) = 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-1.22, < 0.0001] and (RR = 1.13, 95%CI: 1.09-1.17, < 0.0001], respectively. However, no significant difference was found between tegoprazan (TPZ) triple therapy and PPI triple therapy in both RCTs and observational studies (RR = 1.04, 95%CI: 0.93-1.16, = 0.5) and (RR = 1.03, 95%CI: 0.97-1.10, = 0.3), respectively.
CONCLUSION
VPZ-based triple therapy outperformed conventional PPI-based triple therapy in eradicating , positioning it as a highly effective first-line regimen. Additionally, TPZ-based triple therapy was non-inferior to classical PPI triple therapy.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clarithromycin; Helicobacter pylori; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Helicobacter Infections; Pyrroles; Amoxicillin; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Observational Studies as Topic; Benzene Derivatives; Imidazoles; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38577188
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v30.i9.1213 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2015The common cold is a frequent illness, which, although benign and self limiting, results in many consultations to primary care and considerable loss of school or work... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The common cold is a frequent illness, which, although benign and self limiting, results in many consultations to primary care and considerable loss of school or work days. Current symptomatic treatments have limited benefit. Corticosteroids are an effective treatment in other upper respiratory tract infections and their anti-inflammatory effects may also be beneficial in the common cold. This updated review has included one additional study.
OBJECTIVES
To compare corticosteroids versus usual care for the common cold on measures of symptom resolution and improvement in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 4), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group's Specialised Register, the Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (2015, Issue 2), NHS Health Economics Database (2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1948 to May week 3, 2015) and EMBASE (January 2010 to May 2015).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised, double-blind, controlled trials comparing corticosteroids to placebo or to standard clinical management.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We were unable to perform meta-analysis and instead present a narrative description of the available evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three trials (353 participants). Two trials compared intranasal corticosteroids to placebo and one trial compared intranasal corticosteroids to usual care; no trials studied oral corticosteroids. In the two placebo-controlled trials, no benefit of intranasal corticosteroids was demonstrated for duration or severity of symptoms. The risk of bias overall was low or unclear in these two trials. In a trial of 54 participants, the mean number of symptomatic days was 10.3 in the placebo group, compared to 10.7 in those using intranasal corticosteroids (P value = 0.72). A second trial of 199 participants reported no significant differences in the duration of symptoms. The single-blind trial in children aged two to 14 years, who were also receiving oral antibiotics, had inadequate reporting of outcome measures regarding symptom resolution. The overall risk of bias was high for this trial. Mean symptom severity scores were significantly lower in the group receiving intranasal steroids in addition to oral amoxicillin. One placebo-controlled trial reported the presence of rhinovirus in nasal aspirates and found no differences. Only one of the three trials reported on adverse events; no differences were found. Two trials reported secondary bacterial infections (one case of sinusitis, one case of acute otitis media; both in the corticosteroid groups). A lack of comparable outcome measures meant that we were unable to combine the data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence does not support the use of intranasal corticosteroids for symptomatic relief from the common cold. However, there were only three trials, one of which was very poor quality, and there was limited statistical power overall. Further large, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in adults and children are required to answer this question.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Androstadienes; Beclomethasone; Child; Child, Preschool; Common Cold; Female; Fluticasone; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26461493
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008116.pub3 -
Cureus Mar 2021There is a perception among ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeons that oral antibiotics are over-prescribed for acute otitis externa (AOE), and the potential for topical... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There is a perception among ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeons that oral antibiotics are over-prescribed for acute otitis externa (AOE), and the potential for topical therapy as first-line treatment is not fully realized in primary care. We evaluated the prescription rate of topical and oral antibiotics for AOE in primary care and in patients referred to the ENT emergency clinic.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed by searching the MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases between January 1990 and October 2020. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. The outcome measures were the rate of topical and oral antibiotic prescriptions for AOE by primary care practitioners and the rate of oral antibiotic prescriptions that were not indicated.
RESULTS
Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of evidence was moderate. The rate of topical antibiotic prescriptions was between 77% and 95%, and oral antibiotics varied between 6% and 30% in patients that were managed only in primary care. Patients that were referred to an ENT emergency clinic had initially been treated by primary care practitioners with topical antibiotics in 14%-60% of cases and oral antibiotics in 16%-17%. The most commonly prescribed oral antibiotics were Amoxicillin and Co-amoxiclav (amoxicillin/clavulanic acid). No study had comprehensively reviewed the indication for oral antibiotics.
CONCLUSION
The rate of topical antibiotic prescriptions for AOE was high in primary care; however, the rate was frequently suboptimal in patients attending the ENT emergency clinic. Although the rate of oral antibiotic prescriptions was relatively low, the choice of antibiotic for empirical treatment frequently did not cover the typical bacteria in AOE. There is a need for improvement in primary care prescribing of topical therapy prior to referral to the ENT emergency clinic.
PubMed: 33927951
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.14149 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2015To determine the most efficacious treatment for eradication of Helicobacter pylori with the lowest likelihood of some common adverse events among pre-recommended and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine the most efficacious treatment for eradication of Helicobacter pylori with the lowest likelihood of some common adverse events among pre-recommended and newer treatment regimens.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase without language or date restrictions.
STUDY SELECTION
Full text reports of randomised controlled trials that compared different eradication treatments for H pylori among adults.
RESULTS
Of the 15,565 studies identified, 143 were eligible and included. Data on 14 kinds of treatments were available. Of 91 possible comparisons for the efficacy outcome, 34 were compared directly and the following treatments performed better: seven days of concomitant treatment (proton pump inhibitor and three kinds of antibiotics administered together), 10 or 14 days of concomitant treatment, 10 or 14 days of probiotic supplemented triple treatment (standard triple treatment which is probiotic supplemented), 10 or 14 days of levofloxacin based triple treatment (proton pump inhibitor, levofloxacin, and antibiotic administered together), 14 days of hybrid treatment (proton pump inhibitor and amoxicillin used for seven days, followed by a proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and 5-nitroimidazole for another seven days), and 10 or 14 days of sequential treatment (five or seven days of a proton pump inhibitor plus amoxicillin, followed by five or seven additional days of a proton pump inhibitor plus clarithromycin and 5-nitroimidazole or amoxicillin). In terms of tolerance, all treatments were considered tolerable, but seven days of probiotic supplemented triple treatment and seven days of levofloxacin based triple treatment ranked best in terms of the proportion of adverse events reported.
CONCLUSION
Comparison of different eradication treatments for H pylori showed that concomitant treatments, 10 or 14 days of probiotic supplemented triple treatment, 10 or 14 days of levofloxacin based triple treatment, 14 days of hybrid treatment, and 10 or 14 days of sequential treatment might be better alternatives for the eradication of H pylori.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clarithromycin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Levofloxacin; Metronidazole; Nitroimidazoles; Probiotics; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 26290044
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h4052 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2018Asthma is a chronic respiratory condition that affects over 300 million adults and children worldwide. It is characterised by wheeze, cough, chest tightness, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a chronic respiratory condition that affects over 300 million adults and children worldwide. It is characterised by wheeze, cough, chest tightness, and shortness of breath. Symptoms typically are intermittent and may worsen over a short time, leading to an exacerbation. Asthma exacerbations can be serious, leading to hospitalisation or even death in rare cases. Exacerbations may be treated by increasing an individual's usual medication and providing additional medication, such as oral steroids. Although antibiotics are sometimes included in the treatment regimen, bacterial infections are thought to be responsible for only a minority of exacerbations, and current guidance states that antibiotics should be reserved for cases in which clear signs, symptoms, or laboratory test results are suggestive of bacterial infection.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and safety of antibiotics in the treatment of asthma exacerbations.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which contains records compiled from multiple electronic and handsearched resources. We also searched trial registries and reference lists of primary studies. We conducted the most recent search in October 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies comparing antibiotic therapy for asthma exacerbations in adults or children versus placebo or usual care not involving an antibiotic. We allowed studies including any type of antibiotic, any dose, and any duration, providing the aim was to treat the exacerbation. We included parallel studies of any duration conducted in any setting and planned to include cluster trials. We excluded cross-over trials. We included studies reported as full-text articles, those published as abstracts only, and unpublished data.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors screened the search results for eligible studies. We extracted outcome data, assessed risk of bias in duplicate, and resolved discrepancies by involving another review author. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), all with a fixed-effect model. We described skewed data narratively. We graded the results and presented evidence in 'Summary of findings' tables for each comparison. Primary outcomes were intensive care unit/high dependence unit (ICU/HDU) admission, duration of symptoms/exacerbations, and all adverse events. Seconday outcomes were mortality, length of hospital admission, relapse after index presentation, and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR).
MAIN RESULTS
Six studies met our inclusion criteria and included a total of 681 adults and children with exacerbations of asthma. Mean age in the three studies in adults ranged from 36.2 to 41.2 years. The three studies in children applied varied inclusion criteria, ranging from one to 18 years of age. Five studies explicitly excluded participants with obvious signs and symptoms of bacterial infection (i.e. those clearly meeting current guidance to receive antibiotics). Four studies investigated macrolide antibiotics, and two studies investigated penicillin (amoxicillin and ampicillin) antibiotics; both studies using penicillin were conducted over 35 years ago. Five studies compared antibiotics versus placebo, and one was open-label. Study follow-up ranged from one to twelve weeks. Trials were of varied methodological quality, and we were able to perform only limited meta-analysis.None of the included trials reported ICU/HDU admission, although one participant in the placebo group of a study including children with status asthmaticus experienced a respiratory arrest and was ventilated. Four studies reported asthma symptoms, but we were able to combine results for only two macrolide studies of 416 participants; the MD in diary card symptom score was -0.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.60 to -0.08), with lower scores (on a 7 point scale) denoting improved symptoms. Two macrolide studies reported symptom-free days. One study of 255 adults authors reported the percentage of symptom-free days at 10 days as 16% in the antibiotic group and 8% in the placebo group. In a further study of 40 children study authors reported significantly more symptom-free days at all time points in the antibiotic group compared with the usual care group. The same study reported the duration in days of the index asthma exacerbation, again favouring the antibiotic group. One study of a penicillin including 69 participants reported asthma symptoms at hospital discharge; the between-group difference for both studies was reported as non-significant.We combined data for serious adverse events from three studies involving 502 participants, but events were rare; the three trials reported only 10 events: five in the antibiotic group and five in the placebo group. We combined data for all adverse events (AEs) from three studies, but the effect estimate is imprecise (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.43). No deaths were reported in any of the included studies.Two studies investigating penicillins reported admission duration; neither study reported a between-group difference. In one study (263 participants) of macrolides, two participants in each arm were reported as experiencing a relapse, defined as a further exacerbation, by the six-week time points. We combined PEFR endpoint results at 10 days for two macrolide studies; the result favoured antibiotics over placebo (MD 23.42 L/min, 95% CI 5.23 to 41.60). One study in children reported the maximum peak flow recorded during the follow-up period, favouring the clarithromycin group, but the confidence interval includes no difference (MD 38.80, 95% CI -11.19 to 88.79).Grading of outcomes ranged from moderate to very low quality, with quality of outcomes downgraded for suspicion of publication bias, indirectness, imprecision, and poor methodological quality of studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found limited evidence that antibiotics given at the time of an asthma exacerbation may improve symptoms and PEFR at follow-up compared with standard care or placebo. However, findings were inconsistent across the six heterogeneous studies included, two of the studies were conducted over 30 years ago and most of the participants included in this review were recruited from emergency departments, limiting the applicability of findings to this population. Therefore we have limited confidence in the results. We found insufficient evidence about several patient-important outcomes (e.g. hospital admission) to form conclusions. We were unable to rule out a difference between groups in terms of all adverse events, but serious adverse events were rare.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Age Factors; Amoxicillin; Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Asthma; Child; Disease Progression; Humans; Length of Stay; Macrolides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29938789
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002741.pub2 -
Gastroenterology Research and Practice 2015Background. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials for eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) that included a treatment arm with a... (Review)
Review
Background. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials for eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) that included a treatment arm with a proton pump inhibitor, rifabutin, and amoxicillin. Materials and Methods. We selected clinical trials that examined the efficacy of H. pylori eradication therapies and included a study arm using the test regimen from major medical literature databases and abstracts from major gastroenterology meetings. We also did subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results. Twenty-one studies were included in systematic review. The total eradication rates of the test regimen were 70.4% by intent-to-treat (ITT) and 72.0% by per-protocol (PP) analyses. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.55 using fixed effects model (P = 0.283) for the test regimen versus other triple regimens. The total eradication rates were 68.4% for the test regimen and 81.9% in the control group by ITT, while the OR was 1.08 using random effects model (P = 0.019). The pooled eradication rate was 66.4% for the test regimen and 67.4% for the control group by ITT. The total adverse effects incidence were 25.1% for the test regimen. Conclusions. The test regimen for H. pylori rescue therapy may be not superior to control regimens in efficacy.
PubMed: 26106411
DOI: 10.1155/2015/415648 -
WMJ : Official Publication of the State... Sep 2020Recent studies have raised concerns that fluoroquinolone use is associated with an increased risk of aortopathy, including aortic aneurysm with and without dissection. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Recent studies have raised concerns that fluoroquinolone use is associated with an increased risk of aortopathy, including aortic aneurysm with and without dissection.
OBJECTIVE
We performed a meta-analysis with a comprehensive literature review to further investigate this association.
METHODS
This analysis was conducted per PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for studies that included adult patients (age >18 years) exposed to fluoroquinolones or control antibiotics (amoxicillin/any other antibiotic) for urinary tract infection or pneumonia with a primary outcome of aortic aneurysm or dissection. Heterogeneity was calculated using Q statistic I.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies-comprised of 59% males-were included in our analysis, which showed an increased combined risk of development of aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection with quinolone exposure when compared with controls (relative risk [RR] = 2.11; 95% CI, 1.62 - 2.75; I= 83.700). Individual relative risk for aortic aneurysm (RR = 2.83; 95% CI, 2.02 - 3.95, I = 89.150) and aortic dissection (RR = 1.99; 95% CI, 1.23 - 3.06; I2= 71.33) also were significantly increased.
CONCLUSION
Compared to other antibiotics, the use of fluoroquinolones was associated with a significantly higher risk of aortic aneurysm and dissection combined.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aortic Dissection; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Aortic Aneurysm; Female; Fluoroquinolones; Humans; Male
PubMed: 33091293
DOI: No ID Found