Cargando…
465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection
BACKGROUND: The initial management of Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) is burdensome. It requires empirical antibiotic therapy that covers both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Vancomycin plus aztreonam are the most commonly used antibiotic combination, nonetheless...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810020/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.538 |
_version_ | 1783462144524681216 |
---|---|
author | Alhifany, Abdullah A Bifari, Nisrin Alatawi, Yasser Ullah Malik, Saad Almangour, Thamer |
author_facet | Alhifany, Abdullah A Bifari, Nisrin Alatawi, Yasser Ullah Malik, Saad Almangour, Thamer |
author_sort | Alhifany, Abdullah A |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The initial management of Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) is burdensome. It requires empirical antibiotic therapy that covers both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Vancomycin plus aztreonam are the most commonly used antibiotic combination, nonetheless, they have many limitations which limits their use. Hence, many new single agents with MRSA and gram-negative coverage, oral options, and/or good safety profile have been developed to be a potential alternative such as: ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, tigecycline and the recent FDA approved antibiotic (delafloxacin). In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing these agents, we decided to conduct a network meta-analysis for these therapeutic regimens. METHODS: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials identified in PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was conducted. We performed both fixed and random effect models for clinical cure as the primary outcome of interest. Additionally, rankograms were generated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to obtain the treatment ranking probabilities in relation to their relative effect. RESULTS: We identified 10 eligible studies involving 4,914 patients. The indirect comparison demonstrated that delafloxacin showed no difference in terms of clinical cure compared with ceftaroline (OR, 0.82, 95% Cr.I 0.39–1.8), ceftobiprole (OR, 0.79, 95% Cr.I 0.32–1.9), SOC (OR, 1.2, 95% Cr.I 0.62–2.4) and tigecycline (OR, 1.0, 95% Cr.I 0.45–2.2) in the fixed effect analysis, nor in the random-effect analysis (OR, 0.8, 95% Cr.I 0.26–2.2; OR, 0.78, 95% Cr.I 0.2–3.0; OR, 1.2, 95% Cr.I 0.51–3.1; and OR, 0.96, 95% Cr.I 0.30–3.0), respectively. Furthermore, the ranking probabilities in the fixed-effect and random-effect analysis showed that ceftaroline was ranked the first in terms of clinical cure (SUCRA, 40.02%) followed by ceftobiprole (SUCRA, 22.80%), delafloxacin (SUCRA, 16.60%), SOC (SUCRA, 13.80%), and then tigecycline (SUCRA, 6.70%). CONCLUSION: Ceftaroline, ceftbiprole, delafoxacin, SOC and tigecycline are similarly effective. However, delafloxacin provides better convenience. Further comparative studies regarding their safety are needed. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6810020 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68100202019-10-28 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection Alhifany, Abdullah A Bifari, Nisrin Alatawi, Yasser Ullah Malik, Saad Almangour, Thamer Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: The initial management of Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) is burdensome. It requires empirical antibiotic therapy that covers both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Vancomycin plus aztreonam are the most commonly used antibiotic combination, nonetheless, they have many limitations which limits their use. Hence, many new single agents with MRSA and gram-negative coverage, oral options, and/or good safety profile have been developed to be a potential alternative such as: ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, tigecycline and the recent FDA approved antibiotic (delafloxacin). In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing these agents, we decided to conduct a network meta-analysis for these therapeutic regimens. METHODS: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials identified in PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was conducted. We performed both fixed and random effect models for clinical cure as the primary outcome of interest. Additionally, rankograms were generated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to obtain the treatment ranking probabilities in relation to their relative effect. RESULTS: We identified 10 eligible studies involving 4,914 patients. The indirect comparison demonstrated that delafloxacin showed no difference in terms of clinical cure compared with ceftaroline (OR, 0.82, 95% Cr.I 0.39–1.8), ceftobiprole (OR, 0.79, 95% Cr.I 0.32–1.9), SOC (OR, 1.2, 95% Cr.I 0.62–2.4) and tigecycline (OR, 1.0, 95% Cr.I 0.45–2.2) in the fixed effect analysis, nor in the random-effect analysis (OR, 0.8, 95% Cr.I 0.26–2.2; OR, 0.78, 95% Cr.I 0.2–3.0; OR, 1.2, 95% Cr.I 0.51–3.1; and OR, 0.96, 95% Cr.I 0.30–3.0), respectively. Furthermore, the ranking probabilities in the fixed-effect and random-effect analysis showed that ceftaroline was ranked the first in terms of clinical cure (SUCRA, 40.02%) followed by ceftobiprole (SUCRA, 22.80%), delafloxacin (SUCRA, 16.60%), SOC (SUCRA, 13.80%), and then tigecycline (SUCRA, 6.70%). CONCLUSION: Ceftaroline, ceftbiprole, delafoxacin, SOC and tigecycline are similarly effective. However, delafloxacin provides better convenience. Further comparative studies regarding their safety are needed. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6810020/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.538 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Abstracts Alhifany, Abdullah A Bifari, Nisrin Alatawi, Yasser Ullah Malik, Saad Almangour, Thamer 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection |
title | 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection |
title_full | 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection |
title_fullStr | 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection |
title_full_unstemmed | 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection |
title_short | 465. Comparative Efficacy of Double vs. Single Antibiotic Regimens for the Empiric Treatment of MRSA-Induced Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection |
title_sort | 465. comparative efficacy of double vs. single antibiotic regimens for the empiric treatment of mrsa-induced acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection |
topic | Abstracts |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810020/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.538 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alhifanyabdullaha 465comparativeefficacyofdoublevssingleantibioticregimensfortheempirictreatmentofmrsainducedacutebacterialskinandskinstructureinfection AT bifarinisrin 465comparativeefficacyofdoublevssingleantibioticregimensfortheempirictreatmentofmrsainducedacutebacterialskinandskinstructureinfection AT alatawiyasser 465comparativeefficacyofdoublevssingleantibioticregimensfortheempirictreatmentofmrsainducedacutebacterialskinandskinstructureinfection AT ullahmaliksaad 465comparativeefficacyofdoublevssingleantibioticregimensfortheempirictreatmentofmrsainducedacutebacterialskinandskinstructureinfection AT almangourthamer 465comparativeefficacyofdoublevssingleantibioticregimensfortheempirictreatmentofmrsainducedacutebacterialskinandskinstructureinfection |