Comparative effectiveness and safety of six antibiotics in treating MRSA infections: A network meta-analysis
Rattachement africain : cn. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: This study conducted a network meta-analysis comparing linezolid, teicoplanin, daptomycin, tigecycline, and ceftaroline fosamil with vancomycin for treating MRSA-related diseases, addressing the lack of comprehensive evaluations in existing research on antibiotic therapy for MRSA infections. METHODS: We systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Librar up to August 22, 2023. All eligible randomized controlled trials of the six antibiotics were included in the NMA, and their effectiveness and safety were compared across various MRSA-related diseases. Categorical data were used for the odds ratio (OR), and continuous data were used for mean difference (SMD). The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) was employed to evaluate the incidence rate. RESULTS: According to SUCRA results, daptomycin was the most effective treatment (73.0%) in bloodstream infections. In pulmonary infections and skin and soft tissue infections, linezolid out-performed other antibiotics in effectiveness rate (90.6% and 86.3%), microbial killing rate (93.3% and 93.1%). Vancomycin showed lower adverse reactions than teicoplanin, with less hepatotoxicity compared to linezolid and tigecycline. Linezolid had higher thrombocytopenia risk but lower nephrotoxicity risk than others. Vancomycin was less effective in microbial killing rates than linezolid across various infections. CONCLUSION: The present research suggests that in pulmonary infections and skin and soft tissue infections, linezolid may be a better option for treating MRSA-related diseases. However, caution is warranted due to the association of linezolid with thrombocytopenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Our study protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of SystematicReviews (PROSPERO); Registration number: CRD42024535142.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of six antibiotics in treating MRSA infections: A network meta-analysis
- Date Crossref
- 01/09/2024
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Central South University Department of Clinical Pharmacology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Neijiang Normal University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
The First People's Hospital of Neijiang pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Third Hospital of Changsha Department of Pharmacy pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Xiangya Hospital Central South University pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Dali University Clinical pharmacy pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Weifang Medical University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Department of Clinical Pharmacy pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
School of Clinical Medicine pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Department of Clinical Pharmacology — Central South University, Neijiang Normal University et The First People's Hospital of Neijiang, avec 6 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.