Antibiotics for acute laryngitis in adults

Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 6.03). 05/2015; 5:CD004783. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004783.pub5
Source: PubMed


This is an update of the original review published in 2005. Acute laryngitis is a common illness worldwide. Diagnosis is often made by case history alone and treatment often targets symptoms.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of different antibiotic therapies in adults with acute laryngitis. A secondary objective was to report the rates of adverse events associated with these treatments.
We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE (January 1966 to November week 3, 2014), EMBASE (1974 to December 2014), LILACS (1982 to December 2014) and BIOSIS (1980 to December 2014).
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antibiotic therapy with placebo for acute laryngitis. The main outcome was objective voice scores.
Two review authors independently extracted and synthesised data.
We included three RCTs (351 participants) that had moderate to high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. We downgraded the studies because of limitations in study design or execution (risk of bias), imprecision and inconsistency of results. We included a new trial presented only as a conference abstract in this update.In one study of acute laryngitis in adults, 100 participants were randomised to receive penicillin V (800 mg twice daily for five days) or an identical placebo. A recording of each patient reading a standardised text was made at the first visit, during re-examination after one and two weeks, and at follow-up after two to six months. No significant differences were found between the groups. The trial also measured symptoms reported by participants and found no significant differences.One study investigated erythromycin for acute laryngitis in 106 adults. The mean objective voice scores measured at the first visit, at re-examination after one and two weeks, and at follow-up after two to six months did not significantly differ between the groups. At one week there were significant beneficial differences in the severity of reported vocal symptoms (slight, moderate and severe) as judged by participants (P value = 0.042). However, the rates of participants having improved voice disturbance (subjective symptoms) at one and two weeks were not significantly different among groups. Comparing erythromycin and placebo groups on the rate of persistence of cough at two weeks, the risk ratio (RR) was 0.38 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.97, P value = 0.04) and the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) was 5.87 (95% CI 3.09 to 65.55). We calculated a RR of 0.64 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.90, P value = 0.034) and a NNTB of 3.76 (95% CI 2.27 to 13.52; P value = 0.01) for the subjective voice scores at one week.A third trial from Russia included 145 patients with acute laryngitis symptoms. Participants were randomised to three treatment groups: Group 1: seven-day course of fusafungine (six times a day by inhalation); Group 2: seven-day course of fusafungine (six times a day by inhalation) plus clarithromycin (250 mg twice daily for seven days); Group 3: no treatment. Clinical cure rates were measured at days 5 ± 1, 8 ± 1 and 28 ± 2. The authors reported significant differences in the rates of clinical cure at day 5 ± 1 favouring fusafungine (one trial; 93 participants; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.20; P value = 0.04) and fusafungine plus clarithromycin (one trial 97 participants; RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.16; P value = 0.05) when compared to no treatment. However, no significant differences were found at days 8 ± 1 and 28 ± 2. Also, no significant differences were found when comparing fusafungine to fusafungine plus clarithromycin at days 5 ± 1, 8 ± 1 and 28 ± 2.
Antibiotics do not appear to be effective in treating acute laryngitis when assessing objective outcomes. They appear to be beneficial for some subjective outcomes. Erythromycin could reduce voice disturbance at one week and cough at two weeks when measured subjectively. Fusafungine could increase the cure rate at day five. The included RCTs had important methodological problems and these modest benefits from antibiotics may not outweigh their cost, adverse effects or negative consequences for antibiotic resistance patterns.

8 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hoarseness (dysphonia) is the reason for about 1% of all consultations in primary care. It has many causes, ranging from self-limited laryngitis to malignant tumors of the vocal cords. This review is based on literature retrieved by a selective search in PubMed employing the terms "hoarseness," "hoarse voice," and "dysphonia," on the relevant guideline of the American Academy of Otolaryngology -Head and Neck Surgery, and on Cochrane reviews. Hoarseness can be caused by acute (42.1%) and chronic laryngitis (9.7%), functional vocal disturbances (30%), and benign (10.7-31%) and malignant tumors (2.2-3%), as well as by neurogenic disturbances such as vocal cord paresis (2.8-8%), physiologic aging of the voice (2%), and psychogenic factors (2-2.2 %). Hoarseness is very rarely a manifestation of internal medical illness. The treatment of hoarseness has been studied in only a few randomized controlled trials, all of which were on a small scale. Voice therapy is often successful in the treatment of functional and organic vocal disturbances (level 1a evidence). Surgery on the vocal cords is indicated to treat tumors and inadequate vocal cord closure. The only entity causing hoarseness that can be treated pharmacologically is chronic laryngitis associated with gastro-esophageal reflux, which responds to treatment of the reflux disorder. The empirical treatment of hoarseness with antibiotics or corticosteroids is not recommended. Voice therapy, vocal cord surgery, and drug therapy for appropriate groups of patients with hoarseness are well documented as effective by the available evidence. In patients with risk factors, especially smokers, hoarseness should be immediately evaluated by laryngos - copy.
    Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 05/2015; 112(19):329-37. DOI:10.3238/arztebl.2015.0329 · 3.52 Impact Factor