We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Carbapenems versus alternative antibiotics for the treatment of bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacter, Citrobacter or Serratia species: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2016 Februrary
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared effects of different antibiotics on mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacteriaceae with chromosomal AmpC β-lactamase.
METHODS: Databases were systematically searched for studies reporting mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by AmpC producers treated with carbapenems, broad-spectrum β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors (BLBLIs), quinolones or cefepime. Pooled ORs for mortality were calculated for cases that received monotherapy with these agents versus carbapenems.
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42014014992; 18 November 2014).
RESULTS: Eleven observational studies were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting empirical and definitive monotherapy. In unadjusted analyses, no significant difference in mortality was found between BLBLIs versus carbapenems used for definitive therapy (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.32-2.36) or empirical therapy (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.14-1.60) or cefepime versus carbapenems as definitive therapy (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.27-1.38) or empirical therapy (0.60; 95% CI 0.17-2.20). Use of a fluoroquinolone as definitive therapy was associated with a lower risk of mortality compared with carbapenems (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.19-0.78). Three studies with patient-level data were used to adjust for potential confounders. The non-significant trends favouring non-carbapenem options in these studies were diminished after adjustment for age, sex and illness severity scores, suggestive of residual confounding.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite limitations of available data, there was no strong evidence to suggest that BLBLIs, quinolones or cefepime were inferior to carbapenems. The reduced risk of mortality observed with quinolone use may reflect less serious illness in patients, rather than superiority over carbapenems.
METHODS: Databases were systematically searched for studies reporting mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by AmpC producers treated with carbapenems, broad-spectrum β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors (BLBLIs), quinolones or cefepime. Pooled ORs for mortality were calculated for cases that received monotherapy with these agents versus carbapenems.
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42014014992; 18 November 2014).
RESULTS: Eleven observational studies were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting empirical and definitive monotherapy. In unadjusted analyses, no significant difference in mortality was found between BLBLIs versus carbapenems used for definitive therapy (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.32-2.36) or empirical therapy (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.14-1.60) or cefepime versus carbapenems as definitive therapy (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.27-1.38) or empirical therapy (0.60; 95% CI 0.17-2.20). Use of a fluoroquinolone as definitive therapy was associated with a lower risk of mortality compared with carbapenems (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.19-0.78). Three studies with patient-level data were used to adjust for potential confounders. The non-significant trends favouring non-carbapenem options in these studies were diminished after adjustment for age, sex and illness severity scores, suggestive of residual confounding.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite limitations of available data, there was no strong evidence to suggest that BLBLIs, quinolones or cefepime were inferior to carbapenems. The reduced risk of mortality observed with quinolone use may reflect less serious illness in patients, rather than superiority over carbapenems.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app