Antibiotics versus topical antiseptics for chronic suppurative otitis media.
Journal
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 01 2020
06 01 2020
Historique:
entrez:
6
1
2020
pubmed:
7
1
2020
medline:
14
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and infection of the middle ear and mastoid cavity, characterised by ear discharge (otorrhoea) through a perforated tympanic membrane. The predominant symptoms of CSOM are ear discharge and hearing loss. Antibiotics and antiseptics kill or inhibit the micro-organisms that may be responsible for the infection. Antibiotics can be applied topically or administered systemically via the oral or injection route. Antiseptics are always directly applied to the ear (topically). To assess the effectiveness of antibiotics versus antiseptics for people with chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM). The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 4, via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 April 2019. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least a one-week follow-up involving patients (adults and children) who had chronic ear discharge of unknown cause or CSOM, where ear discharge had continued for more than two weeks. The intervention was any single, or combination of, antibiotic agent, whether applied topically (without steroids) or systemically. The comparison was any single, or combination of, topical antiseptic agent, applied as ear drops, powders or irrigations, or as part of an aural toileting procedure. Two comparisons were topical antiseptics compared to: a) topical antibiotics or b) systemic antibiotics. Within each comparison we separated where both groups of patients had received topical antibiotic a) alone or with aural toilet and b) on top of background treatment (such as systemic antibiotics). We used the standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were: resolution of ear discharge or 'dry ear' (whether otoscopically confirmed or not), measured at between one week and up to two weeks, two weeks to up to four weeks, and after four weeks; health-related quality of life using a validated instrument; and ear pain (otalgia) or discomfort or local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications and ototoxicity measured in several ways. We identified seven studies (935 participants) across four comparisons with antibiotics compared against acetic acid, aluminium acetate, boric acid and povidone-iodine. None of the included studies reported the outcomes of quality of life or serious complications. A. Topical antiseptic (acetic acid) versus topical antibiotics (quinolones or aminoglycosides) It is very uncertain if there is a difference in resolution of ear discharge with acetic acid compared with aminoglycosides at one to two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.08; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported results for ear discharge after four weeks. It was very uncertain if there was more ear pain, discomfort or local irritation with acetic acid or topical antibiotics due to the low numbers of participants reporting events (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.34; 2 RCTs; 189 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No differences between groups were reported narratively for hearing (quinolones) or suspected ototoxicity (aminoglycosides) (very low-certainty evidence). B. Topical antiseptic (aluminium acetate) versus topical antibiotics No results for the one study comparing topical antibiotics with aluminium acetate could be used in the review. C. Topical antiseptic (boric acid) versus topical antibiotics (quinolones) One study reported more participants with resolution of ear discharge when using topical antibiotics (quinolones) compared with boric acid ear drops at between one to two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 1.92; 1 study; 409 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that one additional person will have resolution of ear discharge for every five people receiving topical antibiotics (compared with boric acid) at two weeks. No study reported results for ear discharge after four weeks. There was a bigger improvement in hearing in the topical antibiotic group compared to the topical antiseptic group (mean difference (MD) 2.79 decibels (dB), 95% CI 0.48 to 5.10; 1 study; 390 participants; low-certainty evidence) but this difference may not be clinically significant. There may be more ear pain, discomfort or irritation with boric acid compared with quinolones (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.98; 2 studies; 510 participants; low-certainty evidence). Suspected ototoxicity was not reported. D. Topical antiseptic (povidone-iodine) versus topical antibiotics (quinolones) It is uncertain if there is a difference between quinolones and povidone-iodine with respect to resolution of ear discharge at one to two weeks (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26; 1 RCT, 39 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported qualitatively that there were no differences between the groups for hearing and no patients developed ototoxic effects (very low-certainty evidence). No results for resolution of ear discharge beyond four weeks, or ear pain, discomfort or irritation, were reported. E. Topical antiseptic (acetic acid) + aural toileting versus topical + systemic antibiotics (quinolones) One study reported that participants receiving topical and oral antibiotics had less resolution of ear discharge compared with acetic acid ear drops and aural toileting (suction clearance every two days) at one month (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.90; 100 participants). The study did not report results for resolution of ear discharge at between one to two weeks, ear pain, discomfort or irritation, hearing or suspected ototoxicity. Treatment of CSOM with topical antibiotics (quinolones) probably results in an increase in resolution of ear discharge compared with boric acid at up to two weeks. There was limited evidence for the efficacy of other topical antibiotics or topical antiseptics and so we are unable to draw conclusions. Adverse events were not well reported.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and infection of the middle ear and mastoid cavity, characterised by ear discharge (otorrhoea) through a perforated tympanic membrane. The predominant symptoms of CSOM are ear discharge and hearing loss. Antibiotics and antiseptics kill or inhibit the micro-organisms that may be responsible for the infection. Antibiotics can be applied topically or administered systemically via the oral or injection route. Antiseptics are always directly applied to the ear (topically).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of antibiotics versus antiseptics for people with chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM).
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 4, via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 April 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least a one-week follow-up involving patients (adults and children) who had chronic ear discharge of unknown cause or CSOM, where ear discharge had continued for more than two weeks. The intervention was any single, or combination of, antibiotic agent, whether applied topically (without steroids) or systemically. The comparison was any single, or combination of, topical antiseptic agent, applied as ear drops, powders or irrigations, or as part of an aural toileting procedure. Two comparisons were topical antiseptics compared to: a) topical antibiotics or b) systemic antibiotics. Within each comparison we separated where both groups of patients had received topical antibiotic a) alone or with aural toilet and b) on top of background treatment (such as systemic antibiotics).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were: resolution of ear discharge or 'dry ear' (whether otoscopically confirmed or not), measured at between one week and up to two weeks, two weeks to up to four weeks, and after four weeks; health-related quality of life using a validated instrument; and ear pain (otalgia) or discomfort or local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications and ototoxicity measured in several ways.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified seven studies (935 participants) across four comparisons with antibiotics compared against acetic acid, aluminium acetate, boric acid and povidone-iodine. None of the included studies reported the outcomes of quality of life or serious complications. A. Topical antiseptic (acetic acid) versus topical antibiotics (quinolones or aminoglycosides) It is very uncertain if there is a difference in resolution of ear discharge with acetic acid compared with aminoglycosides at one to two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.08; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported results for ear discharge after four weeks. It was very uncertain if there was more ear pain, discomfort or local irritation with acetic acid or topical antibiotics due to the low numbers of participants reporting events (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.34; 2 RCTs; 189 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No differences between groups were reported narratively for hearing (quinolones) or suspected ototoxicity (aminoglycosides) (very low-certainty evidence). B. Topical antiseptic (aluminium acetate) versus topical antibiotics No results for the one study comparing topical antibiotics with aluminium acetate could be used in the review. C. Topical antiseptic (boric acid) versus topical antibiotics (quinolones) One study reported more participants with resolution of ear discharge when using topical antibiotics (quinolones) compared with boric acid ear drops at between one to two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 1.92; 1 study; 409 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that one additional person will have resolution of ear discharge for every five people receiving topical antibiotics (compared with boric acid) at two weeks. No study reported results for ear discharge after four weeks. There was a bigger improvement in hearing in the topical antibiotic group compared to the topical antiseptic group (mean difference (MD) 2.79 decibels (dB), 95% CI 0.48 to 5.10; 1 study; 390 participants; low-certainty evidence) but this difference may not be clinically significant. There may be more ear pain, discomfort or irritation with boric acid compared with quinolones (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.98; 2 studies; 510 participants; low-certainty evidence). Suspected ototoxicity was not reported. D. Topical antiseptic (povidone-iodine) versus topical antibiotics (quinolones) It is uncertain if there is a difference between quinolones and povidone-iodine with respect to resolution of ear discharge at one to two weeks (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26; 1 RCT, 39 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported qualitatively that there were no differences between the groups for hearing and no patients developed ototoxic effects (very low-certainty evidence). No results for resolution of ear discharge beyond four weeks, or ear pain, discomfort or irritation, were reported. E. Topical antiseptic (acetic acid) + aural toileting versus topical + systemic antibiotics (quinolones) One study reported that participants receiving topical and oral antibiotics had less resolution of ear discharge compared with acetic acid ear drops and aural toileting (suction clearance every two days) at one month (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.90; 100 participants). The study did not report results for resolution of ear discharge at between one to two weeks, ear pain, discomfort or irritation, hearing or suspected ototoxicity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Treatment of CSOM with topical antibiotics (quinolones) probably results in an increase in resolution of ear discharge compared with boric acid at up to two weeks. There was limited evidence for the efficacy of other topical antibiotics or topical antiseptics and so we are unable to draw conclusions. Adverse events were not well reported.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31902139
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013056.pub2
pmc: PMC6956626
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Anti-Infective Agents, Local
0
Quinolones
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
CD013056Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : NIHR-RP-011-045
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Références
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Oct;132(10):1115-8
pubmed: 17043261
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1997 Feb;22(1):44-6
pubmed: 9088679
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Jan;270(1):69-76
pubmed: 22249835
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000 Nov;123(5):617-23
pubmed: 11077352
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2006 Jan;70(1):1-12
pubmed: 16198004
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1991 Apr;16(2):142-4
pubmed: 2070529
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992 Aug;118(8):842-4
pubmed: 1642836
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Oct 19;(4):CD004618
pubmed: 16235370
J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2012 Oct;3(4):320-4
pubmed: 23326103
N Z Med J. 1981 Nov 25;94(696):373-5
pubmed: 7033848
Laryngoscope. 1989 Jun;99(6 Pt 1):655-9
pubmed: 2725163
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 1999 Jan-Feb;50(1):15-9
pubmed: 10091344
N Z Med J. 1986 Oct 22;99(812):812-5
pubmed: 3466089
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 14;9:CD013057
pubmed: 32926406
J Laryngol Otol. 2015 Dec;129(12):1253
pubmed: 26429519
BMJ Clin Evid. 2012 Aug 06;2012:
pubmed: 23870746
Med J Aust. 2003 Aug 18;179(4):185-90
pubmed: 12914507
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jan 25;(1):CD005608
pubmed: 16437533
Arch Med Res. 2005 Mar-Apr;36(2):154-8
pubmed: 15847949
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c332
pubmed: 20332509
Ear Nose Throat J. 2008 Dec;87(12):E19
pubmed: 19105130
PLoS Med. 2017 Nov 16;14(11):e1002447
pubmed: 29145404
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2003 Aug-Sep;54(7):485-90
pubmed: 14671920
Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac. 1978 Jan-Feb;95(1-2):43-55
pubmed: 207210
East Mediterr Health J. 2001 Jan-Mar;7(1-2):26-30
pubmed: 12596948
Clin Otolaryngol. 2007 Oct;32(5):330-6
pubmed: 17883551
Lancet. 1996 Oct 26;348(9035):1128-33
pubmed: 8888166
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e36226
pubmed: 22558393
Clin Med Insights Ear Nose Throat. 2018 Jan 11;11:1179550617751907
pubmed: 29348711
Ethn Health. 2005 May;10(2):91-111
pubmed: 15804658
J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jun;8(6):KC01-4
pubmed: 25121008
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 6;1:CD013055
pubmed: 31902140
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1992 Jul;24(1):25-33
pubmed: 1399301
Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2013 Oct;3(4):598-601
pubmed: 24380016
Clin Otolaryngol. 2012 Aug;37(4):261-70
pubmed: 22804826
Trop Med Int Health. 2005 Feb;10(2):190-7
pubmed: 15679563
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2009 May;63(5):1011-6
pubmed: 19297377
West Afr J Med. 1990 Apr-Jun;9(2):89-97
pubmed: 2268574
BMJ. 2011 Mar 03;342:d1088
pubmed: 21372073
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000 Jun;122(6):934-40
pubmed: 10828818
Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg. 2002 Mar-Apr;9(2):106-11
pubmed: 12122630
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 1995 Jan-Feb;46(1):15-8
pubmed: 7734157
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Sep;67(3):314-8
pubmed: 26405670
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Sep 08;2:16063
pubmed: 27604644
J Pediatr. 1990 Jun;116(6):991-6
pubmed: 2189979
Pediatrics. 2007 May;119(5):897-904
pubmed: 17473089
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2002 Mar 15;63(1):49-56
pubmed: 11879929
Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Jun 1;40(11):1650-6
pubmed: 15889364
Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Feb;31(1):140-9
pubmed: 11914310
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Oct;123(10):1057-60
pubmed: 9339980
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 9;2:CD013053
pubmed: 33561891
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
pubmed: 9310563
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 May;76(5):623-35
pubmed: 22404948
Laryngoscope. 2000 Mar;110(3 Pt 3):32-5
pubmed: 10718413
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2015 Feb;35(1):39-44
pubmed: 26015650
Scand J Infect Dis. 2000;32(2):197-9
pubmed: 10826908
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl. 2002 Mar;188:8-18
pubmed: 11968863
Am J Otol. 1994 Sep;15(5):670-3
pubmed: 8572070
Hum Biol. 2015 Apr;87(2):92-108
pubmed: 26829293
Otol Neurotol. 2014 Mar;35(3):454-8
pubmed: 24518406
Laryngoscope. 2007 Feb;117(2):264-7
pubmed: 17277619
J Laryngol Otol. 1996 Apr;110(4):309-14
pubmed: 8733449
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1990 Feb;15(1):7-10
pubmed: 2323085
East Afr Med J. 2006 Jun;83(6):322-5
pubmed: 16989377
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003 Oct;129(10):1098-100
pubmed: 14568795
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995 Dec;121(12):1414-6
pubmed: 7488373
Clin Otolaryngol. 2014 Dec;39(6):362-7
pubmed: 25142494
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Sep;77(9):1530-5
pubmed: 23906989
Chemotherapy. 1994;40 Suppl 1:16-23
pubmed: 7805426
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Jun 29;9:48
pubmed: 21711571
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983 Oct 8;287(6398):1024
pubmed: 6412934
J Laryngol Otol. 2015 Aug;129(8):779-83
pubmed: 26072993
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2010 Mar;74(3):283-6
pubmed: 20042241
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 2;1:CD013051
pubmed: 31896168
J Int Adv Otol. 2015 Dec;11(3):248-52
pubmed: 26915158
Med J Aust. 2004 Jan 19;180(2):91; author reply 92-3
pubmed: 14723593
J Med Microbiol. 2015 Oct;64(10):1103-1116
pubmed: 26248613
Ear Nose Throat J. 1998 Nov;77(11):904-5, 909
pubmed: 9846467
J Laryngol Otol. 1988 Jun;102(6):491-5
pubmed: 3294318
Pediatrics. 2007 Dec;120(6):1403; author reply 1403-4
pubmed: 18055693
Int J Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;40(6):1732-4
pubmed: 20026595
Clin Otolaryngol. 2005 Apr;30(2):193-4
pubmed: 15839875
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 1996 May-Jun;47(3):217-20
pubmed: 8924287
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990 May;116(5):557-9
pubmed: 2328112
Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999 Jan;12(1):147-79
pubmed: 9880479
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Oct;117(4):405-8
pubmed: 9339804
J Laryngol Otol. 2000 Jun;114(6):432-6
pubmed: 10962675
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2008 Aug;27(8):692-8
pubmed: 18664984
Otol Neurotol. 2008 Oct;29(7):961-4
pubmed: 18758386
Harefuah. 1998 Jan 1;134(1):32-6, 78
pubmed: 9517277
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 6;1:CD013056
pubmed: 31902139
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 04;2(2):CD013052
pubmed: 35819801
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Aug 27;8:CD013054
pubmed: 35659673
An Otorrinolaringol Ibero Am. 1995;22(5):521-33
pubmed: 7485860