The Use of Vancomycin Versus Teicoplanin in Treating Febrile Neutropenia: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Background and objective The efficacy of vancomycin vs. teicoplanin for the successful treatment of febrile neutropenia (FN) has been a subject of debate in the medical community. In light of this, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two medications in the treatment of patients with FN in terms of treatment success and adverse events. Data source and study design We conducted a search of major electronic databases [MEDLINE (PubMed, Ovid), Google Scholar, clinicaltrial.org], which returned 10 studies with 1,630 patients (vancomycin: 788; teicoplanin: 842) for analysis. An unadjusted odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for all studies, as well as separate sub-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies. Results The average age of patients ranged from 37 to 57 years in the vancomycin group and 31 to 57 years in the teicoplanin group (n=9 studies). Over half of the patients in both groups were male (vancomycin: 55.6%; teicoplanin: 57.7%; n=9 studies). Both overall evaluation and sub-analyses revealed that both treatments were comparable in terms of treatment success, nephrotoxicity, and red man syndrome. The vancomycin group was more likely to develop skin rashes (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.28-4.83). The heterogeneity for all analyses ranged from 0-47.4%. Conclusion Our analysis showed that vancomycin and teicoplanin showed comparable results in terms of successful treatment of FN. Adverse effects such as nephrotoxicity and red man syndrome were also comparable between the two treatment groups.