Cargando…
Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections are considered an important public health problem, and treatment options are limited. Accordingly, in this meta-analysis, we analyzed published studies to survey in vitro activity of recently approved antibiotics against MRSA...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9382732/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35978400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12941-022-00529-z |
_version_ | 1784769346123333632 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Fei Rajabi, Sajad Shi, Chunhua Afifirad, Ghazale Omidi, Nazanin Kouhsari, Ebrahim Khoshnood, Saeed Azizian, Khalil |
author_facet | Liu, Fei Rajabi, Sajad Shi, Chunhua Afifirad, Ghazale Omidi, Nazanin Kouhsari, Ebrahim Khoshnood, Saeed Azizian, Khalil |
author_sort | Liu, Fei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections are considered an important public health problem, and treatment options are limited. Accordingly, in this meta-analysis, we analyzed published studies to survey in vitro activity of recently approved antibiotics against MRSA isolates. METHODS: We searched electronic databases; PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies (until November 30, 2020) that have focused on the in vitro activity of telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, and tedizolid against MRSA isolates. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software (version 14.0). RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall in vitro activity of tedizolid on 12,204 MRSA isolates was 0.250 and 0.5 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), (minimum inhibitory concentration at which 50% and 90% of isolates were inhibited, respectively), respectively. The overall antibacterial activity of dalbavancin on 28539 MRSA isolates was 0.060 and 0.120 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively. The overall antibacterial activity of oritavancin on 420 MRSA isolates was 0.045 and 0.120 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively. The overall antibacterial activity of telavancin on 7353 MRSA isolates was 0.032 and 0.060 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively. The pooled prevalence of tedizolid, telavancin, and dalbavancin susceptibility was 100% (95% CI: 100–100). CONCLUSION: Telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, and tedizolid had potent in vitro activity against MRSA isolates. The low MICs and high susceptibility rates of these antibiotics recommend a hopeful direction to introduce useful antibiotics in treating MRSA infections in the future. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12941-022-00529-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9382732 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93827322022-08-18 Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis Liu, Fei Rajabi, Sajad Shi, Chunhua Afifirad, Ghazale Omidi, Nazanin Kouhsari, Ebrahim Khoshnood, Saeed Azizian, Khalil Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob Review BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections are considered an important public health problem, and treatment options are limited. Accordingly, in this meta-analysis, we analyzed published studies to survey in vitro activity of recently approved antibiotics against MRSA isolates. METHODS: We searched electronic databases; PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies (until November 30, 2020) that have focused on the in vitro activity of telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, and tedizolid against MRSA isolates. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software (version 14.0). RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall in vitro activity of tedizolid on 12,204 MRSA isolates was 0.250 and 0.5 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), (minimum inhibitory concentration at which 50% and 90% of isolates were inhibited, respectively), respectively. The overall antibacterial activity of dalbavancin on 28539 MRSA isolates was 0.060 and 0.120 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively. The overall antibacterial activity of oritavancin on 420 MRSA isolates was 0.045 and 0.120 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively. The overall antibacterial activity of telavancin on 7353 MRSA isolates was 0.032 and 0.060 µg/mL for MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively. The pooled prevalence of tedizolid, telavancin, and dalbavancin susceptibility was 100% (95% CI: 100–100). CONCLUSION: Telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, and tedizolid had potent in vitro activity against MRSA isolates. The low MICs and high susceptibility rates of these antibiotics recommend a hopeful direction to introduce useful antibiotics in treating MRSA infections in the future. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12941-022-00529-z. BioMed Central 2022-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9382732/ /pubmed/35978400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12941-022-00529-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Liu, Fei Rajabi, Sajad Shi, Chunhua Afifirad, Ghazale Omidi, Nazanin Kouhsari, Ebrahim Khoshnood, Saeed Azizian, Khalil Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (mrsa) strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9382732/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35978400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12941-022-00529-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liufei antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT rajabisajad antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shichunhua antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT afifiradghazale antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT omidinazanin antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kouhsariebrahim antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT khoshnoodsaeed antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT aziziankhalil antibacterialactivityofrecentlyapprovedantibioticsagainstmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusmrsastrainsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |