Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cefazolin Versus Anti-Staphylococcal Penicillins for the Treatment of Patients with Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Infection: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.
Allen, John M; Bakare, Lolade; Casapao, Anthony M; Klinker, Ken; Childs-Kean, Lindsey M; Pomputius, Ariel F.
  • Allen JM; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Orlando, FL, USA. john.allen@cop.ufl.edu.
  • Bakare L; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA. john.allen@cop.ufl.edu.
  • Casapao AM; University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Orlando, FL, USA.
  • Klinker K; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
  • Childs-Kean LM; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  • Pomputius AF; Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Infect Dis Ther ; 8(4): 671-686, 2019 Dec.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31392580
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) is a common cause of infection in humans. Beta-lactam antibiotics are the preferred agents, with anti-staphylococcal penicillins (ASPs) or the first-generation cephalosporin, cefazolin, favored by clinicians. Recent studies comparing the two strategies suggest similar outcomes between the agents. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to explore differences between cefazolin and ASPs for the treatment of MSSA infections.

METHODS:

We performed a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) of observational or cohort studies using a random-effects model. Two blinded reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, risk of bias, and data extraction. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical failure, infection recurrence, and antibiotic discontinuation due to adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted for the primary outcome by type of ASP, studies with a high percentage of deep-seated infections, and studies of low to moderate risk of bias.

RESULTS:

After performing a comprehensive search of the literature, and screening for study inclusion, 19 studies (13,390 patients) were included in the final meta-analysis. Fifteen of the 19 studies (79%) were judged as having a low or moderate risk of bias. Use of cefazolin was associated with lower all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-0.91, p = 0.006, I2 = 28%], clinical failure (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.74, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%), and antibiotic discontinuation due to adverse events (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.16-0.39, p < 0.001, I2 = 23%). Infection recurrence was higher in the cefazolin patients (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.04-1.93, p = 0.03, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION:

This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of cefazolin was associated with significant reductions in all-cause mortality, clinical failure, and discontinuation due to adverse events, but was associated with an increased risk of infection recurrence.

FUNDING:

University of Florida Open Access Publishing Fund funded the Rapid Service Fees. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (study ID CRD42018106442).
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article