Systemic antibiotics 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:
04 02 2021
04 02 2021
Historique:
entrez:
12
7
2022
pubmed:
4
2
2021
medline:
15
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) 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. Systemic antibiotics are a commonly used treatment option for CSOM, which act to kill or inhibit the growth of micro-organisms that may be responsible for the infection. Antibiotics can be used alone or in addition to other treatments for CSOM. To assess the effects of systemic antibiotics for people with CSOM. The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 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Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials.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 16 March 2020. We included randomised controlled trials comparing systemic antibiotics (oral, injection) against placebo/no treatment or other systemic antibiotics with at least a one-week follow-up period, involving patients with chronic (at least two weeks) ear discharge of unknown cause or due to CSOM. Other treatments were allowed if both treatment and control arms also received it. 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; ear pain (otalgia) or discomfort or local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications and ototoxicity measured in several ways. We included 18 studies (2135 participants) with unclear or high risk of bias. 1. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo It is very uncertain if there is a difference between systemic (intravenous) antibiotics and placebo in the resolution of ear discharge at between one and two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 8.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.88 to 38.21; 33 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report results for resolution of ear discharge after two weeks. Health-related quality of life was not reported. The evidence is very uncertain for hearing and serious (intracranial) complications. Ear pain and suspected ototoxicity were not reported. 2. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo (both study arms received topical antibiotics) Six studies were included of which five presented useable data. There may be little or no difference in the resolution of ear discharge at between one to two weeks for oral ciprofloxacin compared to placebo or no treatment when ciprofloxacin ear drops were used in both intervention arms (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; 390 participants; low-certainty evidence). No results after two weeks were reported. Health-related quality of life was not reported. The evidence is very uncertain for ear pain, serious complications and suspected ototoxicity. 3. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo (both study arms received other background treatments) Two studies used topical antibiotics plus steroids as background treatment in both arms. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in resolution of ear discharge between metronidazole and placebo at four weeks (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.65; 40 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). This study did not report other outcomes. It is also very uncertain if resolution of ear discharge at six weeks was improved with co-trimoxazole compared to placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.16; 98 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Resolution of ear discharge was not reported at other time points. From the narrative report there was no evidence of a difference between groups for health-related quality of life, hearing or serious complications (very low-certainty evidence). One study (136 participants) used topical antiseptics as background treatment in both arms and found similar resolution of ear discharge between the amoxicillin and no treatment groups at three to four months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.41; 136 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The narrative report indicated no evidence of differences in hearing or suspected ototoxicity (both very low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were reported. 4. Different types of systemic antibiotics This is a summary of four comparisons, where different antibiotics were compared to each other. Eight studies compared different types of systemic antibiotics against each other: quinolones against beta-lactams (four studies), lincosamides against nitroimidazoles (one study) and comparisons of different types of beta-lactams (three studies). It was not possible to conclude if there was one class or type of systemic antibiotic that was better in terms of resolution of ear discharge. The studies did not report adverse events well. There was a limited amount of evidence available to examine whether systemic antibiotics are effective in achieving resolution of ear discharge for people with CSOM. When used alone (with or without aural toileting), we are very uncertain if systemic antibiotics are more effective than placebo or no treatment. When added to an effective intervention such as topical antibiotics, there seems to be little or no difference in resolution of ear discharge (low-certainty evidence). Data were only available for certain classes of antibiotics and it is very uncertain whether one class of systemic antibiotic may be more effective than another. Adverse effects of systemic antibiotics were poorly reported in the studies included. As we found very sparse evidence for their efficacy, the possibility of adverse events may detract from their use for CSOM.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) 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. Systemic antibiotics are a commonly used treatment option for CSOM, which act to kill or inhibit the growth of micro-organisms that may be responsible for the infection. Antibiotics can be used alone or in addition to other treatments for CSOM.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of systemic antibiotics for people with CSOM.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 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 16 March 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials comparing systemic antibiotics (oral, injection) against placebo/no treatment or other systemic antibiotics with at least a one-week follow-up period, involving patients with chronic (at least two weeks) ear discharge of unknown cause or due to CSOM. Other treatments were allowed if both treatment and control arms also received it.
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; ear pain (otalgia) or discomfort or local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications and ototoxicity measured in several ways.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 18 studies (2135 participants) with unclear or high risk of bias. 1. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo It is very uncertain if there is a difference between systemic (intravenous) antibiotics and placebo in the resolution of ear discharge at between one and two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 8.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.88 to 38.21; 33 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report results for resolution of ear discharge after two weeks. Health-related quality of life was not reported. The evidence is very uncertain for hearing and serious (intracranial) complications. Ear pain and suspected ototoxicity were not reported. 2. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo (both study arms received topical antibiotics) Six studies were included of which five presented useable data. There may be little or no difference in the resolution of ear discharge at between one to two weeks for oral ciprofloxacin compared to placebo or no treatment when ciprofloxacin ear drops were used in both intervention arms (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; 390 participants; low-certainty evidence). No results after two weeks were reported. Health-related quality of life was not reported. The evidence is very uncertain for ear pain, serious complications and suspected ototoxicity. 3. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo (both study arms received other background treatments) Two studies used topical antibiotics plus steroids as background treatment in both arms. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in resolution of ear discharge between metronidazole and placebo at four weeks (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.65; 40 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). This study did not report other outcomes. It is also very uncertain if resolution of ear discharge at six weeks was improved with co-trimoxazole compared to placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.16; 98 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Resolution of ear discharge was not reported at other time points. From the narrative report there was no evidence of a difference between groups for health-related quality of life, hearing or serious complications (very low-certainty evidence). One study (136 participants) used topical antiseptics as background treatment in both arms and found similar resolution of ear discharge between the amoxicillin and no treatment groups at three to four months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.41; 136 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The narrative report indicated no evidence of differences in hearing or suspected ototoxicity (both very low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were reported. 4. Different types of systemic antibiotics This is a summary of four comparisons, where different antibiotics were compared to each other. Eight studies compared different types of systemic antibiotics against each other: quinolones against beta-lactams (four studies), lincosamides against nitroimidazoles (one study) and comparisons of different types of beta-lactams (three studies). It was not possible to conclude if there was one class or type of systemic antibiotic that was better in terms of resolution of ear discharge. The studies did not report adverse events well.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was a limited amount of evidence available to examine whether systemic antibiotics are effective in achieving resolution of ear discharge for people with CSOM. When used alone (with or without aural toileting), we are very uncertain if systemic antibiotics are more effective than placebo or no treatment. When added to an effective intervention such as topical antibiotics, there seems to be little or no difference in resolution of ear discharge (low-certainty evidence). Data were only available for certain classes of antibiotics and it is very uncertain whether one class of systemic antibiotic may be more effective than another. Adverse effects of systemic antibiotics were poorly reported in the studies included. As we found very sparse evidence for their efficacy, the possibility of adverse events may detract from their use for CSOM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35819801
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013052.pub2
pmc: PMC8094871
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Ciprofloxacin
5E8K9I0O4U
Amoxicillin
804826J2HU
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
CD013052Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Références
Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull. 2002 Apr;28(1):36-44
pubmed: 12587759
J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jun;8(6):KC01-4
pubmed: 25121008
N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 20;370(8):723-33
pubmed: 24552319
Jpn J Antibiot. 1982 Jun;35(6):1523-52
pubmed: 6752467
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1978 Sep 20;98(26):1273-5
pubmed: 754336
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 1999 Jan-Feb;50(1):15-9
pubmed: 10091344
Can Med Assoc J. 1975 Jun 14;112(13 Spec No):83-6
pubmed: 805651
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1995 Aug;14(8):669-76
pubmed: 8565983
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992 Aug;118(8):842-4
pubmed: 1642836
Pharm Weekbl Sci. 1986 Feb 21;8(1):63-6
pubmed: 2938071
N Z Med J. 1981 Nov 25;94(696):373-5
pubmed: 7033848
J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2012 Oct;3(4):320-4
pubmed: 23326103
J Med Assoc Thai. 1995 Jan;78(1):18-21
pubmed: 7622972
J Laryngol Otol. 1980 Jun;94(6):607-15
pubmed: 7430782
J Infect Dis. 1973 Nov;128:Suppl:696-700
pubmed: 4202209
Laryngoscope. 1986 Feb;96(2):146-51
pubmed: 3945144
Zh Ushn Nos Gorl Bolezn. 1976 Mar-Apr;(2):64-70
pubmed: 1266398
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
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Jul;117(1):83-90
pubmed: 9230329
Laryngoscope. 1969 Mar;79(3):494-8
pubmed: 5776741
J Otolaryngol. 2000 Jun;29(3):148-53
pubmed: 10883827
BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2019 Jul 27;20(1):46
pubmed: 31351491
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993 Jul;109(1):77-82
pubmed: 8393167
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Oct;132(10):1115-8
pubmed: 17043261
Ear Nose Throat J. 2008 Dec;87(12):E19
pubmed: 19105130
J Laryngol Otol. 1999 Jan;113(1):10-2
pubmed: 10341911
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2003 Aug-Sep;54(7):485-90
pubmed: 14671920
Vestn Otorinolaringol. 1991 Mar-Apr;(2):56-8
pubmed: 2048256
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e36226
pubmed: 22558393
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1984 Nov;17(4):673-7
pubmed: 6514359
J Pediatr. 1992 Sep;121(3):459-65
pubmed: 1517926
Clin Med Insights Ear Nose Throat. 2018 Jan 11;11:1179550617751907
pubmed: 29348711
Trials. 2016 Mar 03;17(1):119
pubmed: 26941013
Ear Nose Throat J. 2002 Aug;81(8 Suppl 1):16-7
pubmed: 12199182
Chemotherapy. 1994;40 Suppl 1:29-34
pubmed: 7805428
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Jan;270(1):69-76
pubmed: 22249835
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Feb;270(2):521-6
pubmed: 22566178
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 6;1:CD013055
pubmed: 31902140
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1992 Jul;24(1):25-33
pubmed: 1399301
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005 Apr;24(4):293-300
pubmed: 15818287
Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2013 Oct;3(4):598-601
pubmed: 24380016
J Med Assoc Thai. 1995 Sep;78(9):455-9
pubmed: 7561571
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1984 Jun;9(3):141-4
pubmed: 6541537
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
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1993 Mar;12(3):246-8
pubmed: 8451104
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
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Apr;116(4):450-3
pubmed: 9141393
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Sep 08;2:16063
pubmed: 27604644
J Pediatr. 1990 Jun;116(6):991-6
pubmed: 2189979
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1990 Aug;9(8):533-8
pubmed: 2235167
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg. 1973;27(1):27-33
pubmed: 4697134
Pediatrics. 2007 May;119(5):897-904
pubmed: 17473089
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2002 Mar 15;63(1):49-56
pubmed: 11879929
Jpn J Antibiot. 1983 Sep;36(9):2595-634
pubmed: 6361325
Jpn J Antibiot. 1986 Jan;39(1):159-76
pubmed: 3517406
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1992 Nov;11(11):925-9
pubmed: 1454433
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 9;2:CD013053
pubmed: 33561891
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
pubmed: 9310563
J Int Med Res. 1982;10(5):333-40
pubmed: 6754505
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2006 Jan;70(1):1-12
pubmed: 16198004
Rhinol Suppl. 1988;4:31-41
pubmed: 2907674
Lijec Vjesn. 1999 Jun;121(6):185-7
pubmed: 10494153
Acta Otolaryngol. 1991;111(1):120-9
pubmed: 1901686
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 May;76(5):623-35
pubmed: 22404948
Laryngoscope. 2000 Mar;110(3 Pt 3):32-5
pubmed: 10718413
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
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1983 Jul;12 Suppl A:365-7
pubmed: 6352646
Laryngoscope. 2007 Feb;117(2):264-7
pubmed: 17277619
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2000 Dec;19(12 Suppl):S166-70
pubmed: 11144399
East Afr Med J. 2006 Jun;83(6):322-5
pubmed: 16989377
Jpn J Antibiot. 1987 Jan;40(1):1-24
pubmed: 3295321
Pak J Med Sci. 2019 Mar-Apr;35(2):510-514
pubmed: 31086542
J Chemother. 2000 Feb;12(1):88-93
pubmed: 10768520
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Sep;77(9):1530-5
pubmed: 23906989
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2000 Dec;19(12 Suppl):S159-65
pubmed: 11144398
Clin Otolaryngol. 2014 Dec;39(6):362-7
pubmed: 25142494
Vestn Otorinolaringol. 1999;(4):22-4
pubmed: 10453230
Chemotherapy. 1994;40 Suppl 1:16-23
pubmed: 7805426
J Laryngol Otol. 2004 Aug;118(8):645-7
pubmed: 15453944
Indian J Physiol Pharmacol. 1992 Jul;36(3):189-92
pubmed: 1473850
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Jun 29;9:48
pubmed: 21711571
Zhongguo Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Za Zhi. 2004 Nov;24(11):989-91
pubmed: 15609596
Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac. 1981;98(1-2):37-40
pubmed: 6269476
J Laryngol Otol. 1981 Mar;95(3):251-9
pubmed: 6257815
J Laryngol Otol. 1977 Apr;91(4):331-40
pubmed: 404375
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
Acta Otolaryngol. 1981 Sep-Oct;92(3-4):285-91
pubmed: 6798820
J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Jun;30(6):688-93
pubmed: 26028918
J Med Microbiol. 2015 Oct;64(10):1103-1116
pubmed: 26248613
Pediatrics. 2007 Dec;120(6):1403; author reply 1403-4
pubmed: 18055693
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2003 Aug;28(4):331-4
pubmed: 12871247
J Otolaryngol. 1976 Aug;5(4):289-97
pubmed: 9519
Laryngoscope. 1979 Jul;89(7 Pt 1):1129-34
pubmed: 449555
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990 May;116(5):557-9
pubmed: 2328112
Vestn Otorinolaringol. 2012;(3):92-4
pubmed: 22951697
JFORL J Fr Otorhinolaryngol Audiophonol Chir Maxillofac. 1976 Apr;25(4):353-4
pubmed: 135074
Otol Neurotol. 2008 Oct;29(7):961-4
pubmed: 18758386
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1997 May;106(5):359-63
pubmed: 9153098
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 6;1:CD013056
pubmed: 31902139
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1983 Feb;8(1):47-51
pubmed: 6831755
Zh Ushn Nos Gorl Bolezn. 1964 Nov-Dec;24(6):17-22
pubmed: 5876597
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1997 Mar;16(3):214-9
pubmed: 9131324
Otol Neurotol. 2004 Jan;25(1):9-13
pubmed: 14724484