Efficacy and Safety of Carbapenems vs New Antibiotics for Treatment of Adult Patients With Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
carbapenem
complicated urinary tract infections
efficacy and safety
new antibiotics
systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal
Open forum infectious diseases
ISSN: 2328-8957
Titre abrégé: Open Forum Infect Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101637045
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2022
May 2022
Historique:
received:
19
08
2020
accepted:
06
10
2020
entrez:
27
4
2022
pubmed:
10
10
2020
medline:
10
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of carbapenems for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs), with the comparators being new antibiotics evaluated for this indication. We searched 13 electronic databases for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and completed and/or ongoing trials. The search terms were developed using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study framework. Pooled efficacy estimates of composite cure (clinical success and microbiological eradication) favored the new antibiotic groups, although this was not statistically significant (risk ratio [RR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.79-1.04). A pooled estimate examining clinical response alone showed no difference between treatment arms (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05), however, new antibiotic treatments were superior to carbapenems for microbiological response (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91). New antibiotic treatments demonstrated a superior microbiological response compared with carbapenems in clinical trials of cUTI, despite an absence of carbapenem resistance. However, it is noteworthy that the clinical response and safety profile of new antibiotics were not different from those of carbapenems.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35474756
doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofaa480
pii: ofaa480
pmc: PMC9031024
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
ofaa480Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.
Références
Antibiotics (Basel). 2019 Apr 06;8(2):
pubmed: 30959901
BMJ. 2018 Jan 30;360:k462
pubmed: 29382641
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Nov;57(11):5284-90
pubmed: 23939900
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018 Aug 1;73(8):2021-2029
pubmed: 29659836
Crit Care Clin. 2013 Jul;29(3):699-715
pubmed: 23830659
mBio. 2019 Aug 27;10(4):
pubmed: 31455657
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011 Nov;55(11):4943-60
pubmed: 21859938
Science. 2003 Jul 4;301(5629):105-7
pubmed: 12843396
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2018 Feb;16(2):111-120
pubmed: 29343141
Pediatr Nephrol. 1993 Oct;7(5):509-14
pubmed: 8251310
Environ Int. 2018 Aug;117:132-138
pubmed: 29747082
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Sep 15;63(6):754-762
pubmed: 27313268
Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 Dec;18(12):1319-1328
pubmed: 30509675
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64
pubmed: 19622511
J Korean Med Sci. 2012 May;27(5):476-83
pubmed: 22563210
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015 May;13(5):269-84
pubmed: 25853778
JAMA. 2005 Feb 23;293(8):949-55
pubmed: 15728165
N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 21;380(8):729-740
pubmed: 30786187
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018 Oct;52(4):443-450
pubmed: 30012440
Infection. 2016 Jun;44(3):395-439
pubmed: 27066980
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2017 Mar;62(2):241-242
pubmed: 28380691
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009 Feb;30(2):193-5
pubmed: 19125678
J Hosp Infect. 2019 May;102(1):37-44
pubmed: 30503367
JAMA. 2019 Jan 22;321(3):301-302
pubmed: 30566189
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 Jun;16(6):661-673
pubmed: 27107460
JAMA. 2018 Feb 27;319(8):788-799
pubmed: 29486041
Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 1997 Mar;88(3):414-9
pubmed: 9125865
Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2016;398:3-33
pubmed: 27406189
Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 Dec;28(12):1921-31
pubmed: 23145859
JAMA. 2018 Sep 11;320(10):984-994
pubmed: 30208454
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217