Efficacy of short-course antibiotic regimens for community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis.
ABSTRACT There is little consensus on the most appropriate duration of antibiotic treatment for community-acquired pneumonia. The goal of this study is to systematically review randomized controlled trials comparing short-course and extended-course antibiotic regimens for community-acquired pneumonia.
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL, and reviewed reference lists from 1980 through June 2006. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials that compared short-course (7 days or less) versus extended-course (>7 days) antibiotic monotherapy for community-acquired pneumonia in adults. The primary outcome measure was failure to achieve clinical improvement.
We found 15 randomized controlled trials matching our inclusion and exclusion criteria comprising 2796 total subjects. Short-course regimens primarily studied the use of azithromycin (n=10), but trials examining beta-lactams (n=2), fluoroquinolones (n=2), and ketolides (n=1) were found as well. Of the extended-course regimens, 3 studies utilized the same antibiotic, whereas 9 involved an antibiotic of the same class. Overall, there was no difference in the risk of clinical failure between the short-course and extended-course regimens (0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-1.02). In addition, there were no differences in the risk of mortality (0.81, 95% CI, 0.46-1.43) or bacteriologic eradication (1.11, 95% CI, 0.76-1.62). In subgroup analyses, there was a trend toward favorable clinical efficacy for the short-course regimens in all antibiotic classes (range of relative risk, 0.88-0.94).
The available studies suggest that adults with mild to moderate community-acquired pneumonia can be safely and effectively treated with an antibiotic regimen of 7 days or less. Reduction in patient exposure to antibiotics may limit the increasing rates of antimicrobial drug resistance, decrease cost, and improve patient adherence and tolerability.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There is a global crisis of antibiotic resistance in part because of the collateral damage of antibiotic use. Reduction in antibiotic consumption is clearly important to minimize this problem. Limiting treatment duration may be the most clinically palatable means of reducing antibiotic consumption. Antimicrobial stewardship programs play an important role in this process. Their effectiveness may be increased by drawing on evidence from randomized controlled trials regarding optimal antibiotic duration. However, in most clinical scenarios, the recommended duration of therapy in published guidelines is based on expert opinion. Biological markers, such as procalcitonin, have been shown to reduce antimicrobial consumption with no adverse outcome in 11 randomized controlled trials. Although procalcitonin may not be the perfect biomarker, the concept of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic discontinuation after clinical stabilization, in conjunction with antimicrobial stewardship programs, appears to be ready for introduction into clinical practice.Clinical Infectious Diseases 05/2011; 52(10):1232-40. · 9.15 Impact Factor
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common infectious disease that still causes substantial morbidity and mortality. Elderly people are frequently affected, and several issues related to care of this condition in the elderly have to be considered. This article reviews current recommendations of guidelines with a special focus on aspects of the care of elderly patients with CAP. The most common pathogen in CAP is still Streptococcus pneumoniae, followed by other pathogens such as Haemophilus influenzae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Legionella species. Antimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem, especially with regard to macrolide-resistant S. pneumoniae and fluoroquinolone-resistant strains. With regard to β-lactam antibacterials, resistance by H. influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis is important, as is the emergence of multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The main management decisions should be guided by the severity of disease, which can be assessed by validated clinical risk scores such as CURB-65, a tool for measuring the severity of pneumonia based on assessment of confusion, serum urea, respiratory rate and blood pressure in patients aged ≥65 years. For the treatment of low-risk pneumonia, an aminopenicillin such as amoxicillin with or without a β-lactamase inhibitor is frequently recommended. Monotherapy with macrolides is also possible, although macrolide resistance is of concern. When predisposing factors for special pathogens are present, a β-lactam antibacterial combined with a β-lactamase inhibitor, or the combination of a β-lactam antibacterial, a β-lactamase inhibitor and a macrolide, may be warranted. If possible, patients who have undergone previous antibacterial therapy should receive drug classes not previously used. For hospitalized patients with non-severe pneumonia, a common recommendation is empirical antibacterial therapy with an aminopenicillin in combination with a β-lactamase inhibitor, or with fluoroquinolone monotherapy. With proven Legionella pneumonia, a combination of β-lactams with a fluoroquinolone or a macrolide is beneficial. In severe pneumonia, ureidopenicillins with β-lactamase inhibitors, broad-spectrum cephalosporins, macrolides and fluoroquinolones are used. A combination of a broad-spectrum β-lactam antibacterial (e.g. cefotaxime or ceftriaxone), piperacillin/tazobactam and a macrolide is mostly recommended. In patients with a predisposition for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a combination of piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, imipenem or meropenem and levofloxacin or ciprofloxacin is frequently used. Treatment duration of more than 7 days is not generally recommended, except for proven infections with P. aeruginosa, for which 15 days of treatment appears to be appropriate. Further care issues in all hospitalized patients are timely administration of antibacterials, oxygen supply in case of hypoxaemia, and fluid management and dose adjustments according to kidney function. The management of elderly patients with CAP is a challenge. Shifts in antimicrobial resistance and the availability of new antibacterials will change future clinical practice. Studies investigating new methods to detect pathogens, determine the optimal antimicrobial regimen and clarify the duration of treatment may assist in further optimizing the management of elderly patients with CAP.Drugs & Aging 07/2011; 28(7):519-37. · 2.67 Impact Factor
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for bloodstream infections is unknown. Shorter durations of therapy have been demonstrated to be as effective as longer durations for many common infections; similar findings in bacteremia could enable hospitals to reduce antibiotic utilization, adverse events, resistance and costs. A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases was conducted for the years 1947-2010. Controlled trials were identified that randomized patients to shorter versus longer durations of treatment for bacteremia, or the infectious foci most commonly causing bacteremia in critically ill patients (catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI), intra-abdominal infections, pneumonia, pyelonephritis and skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI)). Twenty-four eligible trials were identified, including one trial focusing exclusively on bacteremia, zero in catheter related bloodstream infection, three in intra-abdominal infection, six in pyelonephritis, thirteen in pneumonia and one in skin and soft tissue infection. Thirteen studies reported on 227 patients with bacteremia allocated to 'shorter' or 'longer' durations of treatment. Outcome data were available for 155 bacteremic patients: neonatal bacteremia (n = 66); intra-abdominal infection (40); pyelonephritis (9); and pneumonia (40). Among bacteremic patients receiving shorter (5-7 days) versus longer (7-21 days) antibiotic therapy, no significant difference was detected with respect to rates of clinical cure (45/52 versus 47/49, risk ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.01), microbiologic cure (28/28 versus 30/32, risk ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.91-1.21), and survival (15/17 versus 26/29, risk ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.76-1.23). No significant differences in clinical cure, microbiologic cure and survival were detected among bacteremic patients receiving shorter versus longer duration antibiotic therapy. An adequately powered randomized trial of bacteremic patients is needed to confirm these findings.Critical care (London, England) 11/2011; 15(6):R267. · 4.61 Impact Factor