A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Antibiotic Use in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Infections: Focus on Clinical Cure.
Antibiotics
Diabetic foot ulcer
Infection
Randomized controlled trial
Systematic review
Journal
Infection & chemotherapy
ISSN: 2093-2340
Titre abrégé: Infect Chemother
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101531537
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
15
12
2021
accepted:
19
02
2022
entrez:
6
4
2022
pubmed:
7
4
2022
medline:
7
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The use of antibiotics in diabetic foot ulcer infections (DFUI) is essential in reducing morbidity. Optimal administration of antibiotics can improve clinical outcomes and reduce the risk of antibiotic resistance. This study aims to review the efficacy, in terms of clinical cure, of various regimens and the duration of antibiotic administration in DFUI patients, based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The efficacy based on microbiological response is also reviewed as the secondary outcome. We used three databases, namely PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect, to search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with DFUI who required antibiotics. A total of 16 studies were included in the systematic review. The study locations and bacterial patterns varied, with the most common pathogen being Most studies have heterogeneous characteristics, possibly due to differences in research location. Therefore, there is no strong evidence to recommend a specific antibiotic with the highest efficacy. However, since all included studies are RCTs, this review provides a good summary in considering antibiotic choices when treating DFUI patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The use of antibiotics in diabetic foot ulcer infections (DFUI) is essential in reducing morbidity. Optimal administration of antibiotics can improve clinical outcomes and reduce the risk of antibiotic resistance. This study aims to review the efficacy, in terms of clinical cure, of various regimens and the duration of antibiotic administration in DFUI patients, based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The efficacy based on microbiological response is also reviewed as the secondary outcome.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
We used three databases, namely PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect, to search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with DFUI who required antibiotics.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies were included in the systematic review. The study locations and bacterial patterns varied, with the most common pathogen being
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Most studies have heterogeneous characteristics, possibly due to differences in research location. Therefore, there is no strong evidence to recommend a specific antibiotic with the highest efficacy. However, since all included studies are RCTs, this review provides a good summary in considering antibiotic choices when treating DFUI patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35384424
pii: 54.125
doi: 10.3947/ic.2021.0144
pmc: PMC8987184
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
125-139Subventions
Organisme : PDUPT
ID : NKB-064/UN2.RST/HKP.05.00/2021
Pays : Indonesia
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 by The Korean Society of Infectious Diseases, Korean Society for Antimicrobial Therapy, and The Korean Society for AIDS.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
No conflict of interest.
Références
Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;54(12):e132-73
pubmed: 22619242
Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2014 Sep;4(5):742-5
pubmed: 25328786
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019 Nov;157:107843
pubmed: 31518657
Diabetes Care. 2015 Feb;38(2):302-7
pubmed: 25414157
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Sep 1;177(9):1308-1315
pubmed: 28604925
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2019 Apr;32(2):95-101
pubmed: 30664029
J Diabetes Complications. 2017 Feb;31(2):407-412
pubmed: 27894749
Diabetes Care. 2006 Jun;29(6):1288-93
pubmed: 16732010
Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Dec 15;47(12):1537-45
pubmed: 18990064
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010 Aug;16(8):1252-7
pubmed: 19832720
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Aug 2;18(1):361
pubmed: 30068306
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014 Apr;78(4):469-80
pubmed: 24439136
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007 Aug;60(2):370-6
pubmed: 17553812
Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12
pubmed: 8721797
Int J Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;71(10):
pubmed: 28892282
Diabet Med. 2018 Jan;35(1):78-88
pubmed: 29083500
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2012 May-Jun;102(3):223-32
pubmed: 22659765
Mol Cell Biochem. 1999 Apr;194(1-2):99-108
pubmed: 10391129
BMC Infect Dis. 2021 Aug 9;21(1):770
pubmed: 34372789
SAGE Open Med. 2018 May 13;6:2050312118773950
pubmed: 29785265
Neoreviews. 2014 Dec 1;15(12):e558-e569
pubmed: 25848346
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2005 Spring;6(1):27-40
pubmed: 15865549
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 Mar;36 Suppl 1:e3282
pubmed: 32176437
Wound Repair Regen. 2018 Sep;26(5):381-391
pubmed: 30099812
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2005 Winter;6(4):439-48
pubmed: 16433608
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014 Jun;33(6):871-8
pubmed: 24452966
Polymers (Basel). 2020 Sep 22;12(9):
pubmed: 32972012
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 14;6:CD011038
pubmed: 28613416
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 Mar;36 Suppl 1:e3280
pubmed: 32176444
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Jun;71(6):1688-96
pubmed: 26888908
Infection. 2013 Feb;41(1):175-86
pubmed: 23180507
Infection. 2009 Oct;37(5):407-17
pubmed: 19768381
Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2017 Sep;16(3):173-182
pubmed: 28836481
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 04;(9):CD009061
pubmed: 26337865
Lancet. 2005 Nov 12;366(9498):1695-703
pubmed: 16291062
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Oct 5;73(7):e1539-e1545
pubmed: 33242083