Risk factors and outcomes of non-tuberculous mycobacteria infection in lung transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with structural lung disease and immunocompromised status are at increased risk of pulmonary non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infection. However, literature on NTM in lung transplant recipients (LTR) is limited. We sought to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis to examine associations with NTM disease and isolation in LTRs and their influence on mortality and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE and Embase was performed on February 23, 2022. NTM disease was defined according to international guidelines. Isolation was defined as any growth of NTM in culture. Odds ratios (OR) were pooled for risk factors of NTM disease or isolation, and hazard ratios (HR) were pooled for mortality or CLAD. RESULTS: Eleven studies totaling 3,371 patients were eligible for inclusion, 10 of which underwent meta-analysis. Cystic fibrosis (OR 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-3.30; I2 = 0%) and pre-transplant NTM isolation (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.20-4.83; I2 = 0%) were associated with NTM disease. Only male sex was associated with NTM isolation (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.01-2.10; I2 = 0%). NTM disease was associated with increased mortality (HR 2.69, 95% CI 1.70-4.26; I2 = 0%) and CLAD (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.03-4.35; I2 = 44%). NTM isolation was not associated with mortality in pooled analysis or CLAD in 1 included study. CONCLUSIONS: NTM disease, but not isolation, is associated with worse outcomes. Several factors were associated with development of NTM disease, including cystic fibrosis and pretransplant NTM isolation. Strategies to optimize prevention and treatment of NTM disease in lung transplant recipients are needed.

Ceftriaxone versus antistaphylococcal antibiotics for definitive treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Optimal therapy for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections is unclear. Current standard of care consists of antistaphylococcal antibiotics (ASAs) such as nafcillin, oxacillin and cefazolin. Ceftriaxone has been evaluated due to its advantage as a once-daily outpatient regimen. However, questions remain regarding its efficacy compared with ASAs. We aimed to conduct a review and synthesis of available literature for outcomes of patients treated with ceftriaxone or ASAs for MSSA infections. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase Ovid, MEDLINE Ovid, Scopus and Web of Science (1990 to June 2021). Risk of bias for cohort studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We pooled risk ratios (RRs) using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model for outcomes of those receiving ceftriaxone versus ASAs. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 index. From 459 identified studies, 7 were included in the quantitative synthesis totalling 1640 patients. Definitive therapy with ceftriaxone was associated with a lower risk of toxicity requiring therapy alteration (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.88; I2 = 0%). There was no difference in terms of 90-day all-cause mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.46-1.88; I2 = 9%), hospital readmission (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.57-1.64; I2 = 0%) or infection recurrence (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.63-1.72; I2 =0%). Current evidence suggests there is no difference in efficacy between ceftriaxone and ASAs for MSSA infection, with a lower risk of toxicity with ceftriaxone. Within the limitations of available retrospective studies, ceftriaxone is a consideration for definitive therapy of MSSA infection. [Trial registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42021259086].