Cargando…

Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Hospital-acquired pneumonia remains the most lethal and expensive nosocomial infection worldwide. Optimal therapy remains controversial. We aimed to compare mortality and clinical response outcomes in patients treated with either linezolid or vancomycin. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kalil, Andre C, Klompas, Michael, Haynatzki, Gleb, Rupp, Mark E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3808765/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24127058
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003912
_version_ 1782288627733102592
author Kalil, Andre C
Klompas, Michael
Haynatzki, Gleb
Rupp, Mark E
author_facet Kalil, Andre C
Klompas, Michael
Haynatzki, Gleb
Rupp, Mark E
author_sort Kalil, Andre C
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Hospital-acquired pneumonia remains the most lethal and expensive nosocomial infection worldwide. Optimal therapy remains controversial. We aimed to compare mortality and clinical response outcomes in patients treated with either linezolid or vancomycin. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Evidence-based Medicine BMJ and abstracts from infectious diseases and critical care meetings were searched through April 2013. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: All randomised clinical trials comparing linezolid to vancomycin for hospital-acquired pneumonia. DATA EXTRACTION: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines were followed. One author extracted the data and two authors rechecked and verified all data. RESULTS: Nine randomised trials with a total of 4026 patients were included. The adjusted absolute mortality risk difference (RD) between linezolid and vancomycin was 0.01% (95% CI −2.1% to 2.1%; p=0.992; I(2)=13.5%. The adjusted absolute clinical response difference was 0.9% (95% CI −1.2% to 3.1%; p=0.409; I(2)=0%. The risk of both microbiological (RD=5.6%, 95% CI −2.2% to 13.3%; p=0.159; I(2)=0%) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (RD=6.4%, 95% CI −4.1% to 16.9%; p=0.230; I(2)=0%) eradication were not different between linezolid and vancomycin. Gastrointestinal side effects were more frequent with linezolid (RD=0.8% (95% CI 0% to 1.5%; p=0.05), but no differences were found with renal failure, thrombocytopenia and drug discontinuation due to adverse events. Our sample size provided 99.9% statistical power to detect differences between drugs regarding clinical response and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid and vancomycin have similar efficacy and safety profiles. The high statistical power and the near-zero efficacy difference between both antibiotics demonstrates that no drug is superior for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3808765
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38087652013-10-29 Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis Kalil, Andre C Klompas, Michael Haynatzki, Gleb Rupp, Mark E BMJ Open Infectious Diseases OBJECTIVE: Hospital-acquired pneumonia remains the most lethal and expensive nosocomial infection worldwide. Optimal therapy remains controversial. We aimed to compare mortality and clinical response outcomes in patients treated with either linezolid or vancomycin. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Evidence-based Medicine BMJ and abstracts from infectious diseases and critical care meetings were searched through April 2013. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: All randomised clinical trials comparing linezolid to vancomycin for hospital-acquired pneumonia. DATA EXTRACTION: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines were followed. One author extracted the data and two authors rechecked and verified all data. RESULTS: Nine randomised trials with a total of 4026 patients were included. The adjusted absolute mortality risk difference (RD) between linezolid and vancomycin was 0.01% (95% CI −2.1% to 2.1%; p=0.992; I(2)=13.5%. The adjusted absolute clinical response difference was 0.9% (95% CI −1.2% to 3.1%; p=0.409; I(2)=0%. The risk of both microbiological (RD=5.6%, 95% CI −2.2% to 13.3%; p=0.159; I(2)=0%) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (RD=6.4%, 95% CI −4.1% to 16.9%; p=0.230; I(2)=0%) eradication were not different between linezolid and vancomycin. Gastrointestinal side effects were more frequent with linezolid (RD=0.8% (95% CI 0% to 1.5%; p=0.05), but no differences were found with renal failure, thrombocytopenia and drug discontinuation due to adverse events. Our sample size provided 99.9% statistical power to detect differences between drugs regarding clinical response and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid and vancomycin have similar efficacy and safety profiles. The high statistical power and the near-zero efficacy difference between both antibiotics demonstrates that no drug is superior for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3808765/ /pubmed/24127058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003912 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
spellingShingle Infectious Diseases
Kalil, Andre C
Klompas, Michael
Haynatzki, Gleb
Rupp, Mark E
Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Infectious Diseases
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3808765/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24127058
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003912
work_keys_str_mv AT kalilandrec treatmentofhospitalacquiredpneumoniawithlinezolidorvancomycinasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT klompasmichael treatmentofhospitalacquiredpneumoniawithlinezolidorvancomycinasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT haynatzkigleb treatmentofhospitalacquiredpneumoniawithlinezolidorvancomycinasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ruppmarke treatmentofhospitalacquiredpneumoniawithlinezolidorvancomycinasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis