Efficacy and Safety of Azithromycin in Infants With Bronchiolitis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Résumé fourni par la source
AIM: To synthesise evidence on the efficacy and safety of azithromycin in infants presenting or admitted to hospital with bronchiolitis in an updated systematic review. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library and CINAHL were searched (last search 19/02/25) for trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of azithromycin in infants with bronchiolitis. Primary outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mechanical ventilation. Risk of bias (RoB2) and the certainty of evidence (GRADE) were evaluated. Data were pooled using fixed-effect meta-analyses. RESULTS: Six RCTs and one pilot RCT were included (N = 867). Azithromycin was associated with a significantly shorter LOS in infants with bronchiolitis, compared to placebo (MD -0.30 days (95% CI -0.58 to -0.02), p = 0.04; low certainty). However, statistical significance was lost in sensitivity analyses. There was no significant difference between the azithromycin and placebo groups in rates of adverse events, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, readmission within 6 months and in most evaluations of persistent respiratory symptoms. The evidence certainty was low to very low across outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support the use of azithromycin as part of hospital care for infants with bronchiolitis, with inconclusive findings on its role in reducing LOS. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023463917.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Efficacy and Safety of Azithromycin in Infants With Bronchiolitis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
- Date Crossref
- 10/10/2025
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.