Dataset Information

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of the antibiotic treatment courses in AECOPD.

ABSTRACT: Background: No consensus exists on the antibiotic treatment course for patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Former studies indicate that shorter courses might have the same efficacy with fewer adverse events, which is inconsistent with guidelines and general practice. Existing evidence allows us to conduct a systematic review and Bayesian analysis on this topic. Methods: Four databases were searched from their inception to January 5, 2023. All statistical estimations were performed using R. "Gemtc" was the core package of analysis. CINeMA was used to assess the grade of confidence of the results. Results: Fourteen studies were included in the Bayesian meta-analysis. No difference in the clinical success rate of antibiotic treatment was observed from a super short course (1-3 days) to a long course (≥10 days). Considering the adverse events, the short course (4-6 days) might be the safest. The majority of results were of high or moderate confidence grade. Conclusion: Short course might cause the fewest adverse events. The clinical efficacy of antibiotics might not depend on the course length. Undeniably, more systematic explorations are warranted to investigate the clinical application of a shorter course of antibiotic treatment.

SUBMITTER: Yu H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9895851 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of the antibiotic treatment courses in AECOPD.

Yu Haichuan H Lei Ting T Su Xiaojie X Zhang Lu L Feng Zhouzhou Z Chen Xinlong X Liu Jian J

Frontiers in pharmacology 20230120

<b>Background:</b> No consensus exists on the antibiotic treatment course for patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Former studies indicate that shorter courses might have the same efficacy with fewer adverse events, which is inconsistent with guidelines and general practice. Existing evidence allows us to conduct a systematic review and Bayesian analysis on this topic. <b>Methods:</b> Four databases were searched from their inception to January 5, ...[more]

PMID: 36744244

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo investigate the efficacy of medical treatment options for Peyronie's disease (PD) including oral drugs, intralesional treatment and mechanical treatment compared with placebo treatment using network meta-analysis (NMA).Materials and methodsWe searched the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PD in PubMed, Cochrane library, and EMBASE up to October 2022. RCTs included medical treatment options: oral drugs, intralesional treatment and mechanical treatment. Studies reporting at least one of the outcome measures of interest including curvature degree, plaque size, and structured questionnaires (International Index of Erectile Function, IIEF) were included.ResultsFinally, 24 studies including 1,643 participants met our selection criteria for NMA. There was no statistically significant treatment compared to placebo of the curvature degree, plaque size, IIEF in Bayesian analysis. The SUCRA values of ranking probabilities for each treatment performance, which indicated that hyperthermia device ranked first in NMA. However, in frequentist analysis, 7 of mono treatments (coenzyme Q10 [CoQ10] 300 mg, hyperthermia device, interferon alpha 2b, pentoxifylline 400 mg, propionyl-L-carnitine 1 g, penile traction therapy [PTT], vitamin E 300 mg) and 2 of combination treatments ("PTT-extracorporeal shockwave treatment", "vitamin E 300 mg-propionyl-L-carnitine 1 g") were statistically significant for improvement of curvature degree, and 9 of mono treatments (CoQ10 300 mg, hyaluronic acid 16 mg, hyperthermia device, interferon alpha 2b, pentoxifylline 400 mg, propionyl-L-carnitine 1 g, verapamil 10 mg, vitamin E 300 mg, vitamin E 400 U) and 3 of combination treatments ("interferon alpha 2b-vitamin E 400 U", "verapamil 10 mg-antioxidants", "vitamin E 300 mg-propionyl-L-carnitine 1 g") were statistically significant in the improvement of plaque size.ConclusionsAt present, there is no clinical treatment alternatives that have been demonstrated to be effective compared to placebo. Nonetheless, as the frequentist approach has shown that a number of agents are efficacious, further research is expected to develop more effective treatment options.

Project description:BackgroundOcular toxoplasmosis (OT) is the most common cause of posterior uveitis, leading to visual impairment in a high proportion of patients. Antibiotics and corticosteroids lower the risk of permanent visual impairment by reducing the size of the retinochoroidal scar, the risk of recurrence, and the severity and duration of acute symptoms. Although OT is a very common cause of infectious posterior uveitis, its treatment remains controversial. Through our systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to provide the best possible evidence-based information on the safety and effectiveness of the different antibiotic regimes for OT.MethodsThis systematic review protocol has been developed based on PRISMA-P guidelines for reporting systematic reviews evaluating health care interventions. We will include all published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different antibiotics used for the treatment of OT. We will consider changes in visual acuity, number of recurrences, improvement or worsening of ocular inflammation, size of lesion, and adverse effects as our outcomes. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment will be undertaken by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion. Studies that compared antibiotics with placebo will be excluded. The reviews will be assessed for quality and relevance. We will assess the risk of bias in five domains according to Cochrane group's tool. The type of data will dictate measures of treatment effect. We will use a random-effects model to calculate our meta-analysis, as eligible studies represent clinically varied populations of participants.DiscussionThe strength of our study will lie in the exhaustive and systematic nature of the literature search, as well as in its methods for assessing quality and analyzing RCT data. Considering the controversial efficacy of the treatment for OT, our study will contribute to improving the existing evidence on the effectiveness of different antibiotics. Future studies may be conducted to increase physicians' awareness of antibiotic therapies, improving the health of patients with OT.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42018085468.

Project description:ImportanceThe optimum antibiotic treatment for cellulitis and erysipelas lacks consensus. The available trial data do not demonstrate the superiority of any agent, and data are limited on the most appropriate route of administration or duration of therapy.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of antibiotic therapy for non-surgically acquired cellulitis.Data sourcesThe following databases were searched to June 28, 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2016, issue 5), Medline (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Information System (LILACS) (from 1982). In addition, 5 trials databases and the reference lists of included studies were searched. Further searches of PubMed and Google Scholar were undertaken from June 28, 2016, to December 31, 2018.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials comparing different antibiotics, routes of administration, and treatment durations were included.Data extraction and synthesisFor data collection and analysis, the standard methodological procedures of the Cochrane Collaboration were used. For dichotomous outcomes, the risk ratio and its 95% CI were calculated. A summary of findings table was created for the primary end points, adopting the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of patients cured, improved, recovered, or symptom-free or symptom-reduced at the end of treatment, as reported by the trial. The secondary outcome was any adverse event.ResultsA total of 43 studies with a total of 5999 evaluable participants, whose age ranged from 1 month to 96 years, were included. Cellulitis was the primary diagnosis in only 15 studies (35%), and in other studies the median (interquartile range) proportion of patients with cellulitis was 29.7% (22.9%-50.3%). Overall, no evidence was found to support the superiority of any 1 antibiotic over another, and antibiotics with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus did not add an advantage. Use of intravenous antibiotics over oral antibiotics and treatment duration of longer than 5 days were not supported by evidence.Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, only low-quality evidence was found for the most appropriate agent, route of administration, and duration of treatment for patients with cellulitis; future trials need to use a standardized set of outcomes, including severity scoring, dosing, and duration of therapy.

Project description:BackgroundEssential tremor (ET) significantly impacts patients' daily lives and quality of life, presenting a considerable challenge in clinical practice. In recent years, novel therapeutic regimens have been investigated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study aims to investigate and evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of various therapeutic interventions for ET.MethodsWe did a systematic review and Bayesian Model-based Network Meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs. Following PRISMA-NMA guidelines, a comprehensive database search was conducted up to April 1, 2024 to identify RCTs focused on ET treatments. The Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method was utilized for the analysis, evaluating the relative efficacy and safety of treatments using standardized mean difference (SMD) and log odds ratios (log ORs), respectively. Additionally, the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) was applied to assess the relative efficacy of the treatment modalities. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023415752.FindingsThis study included 33 RCTs involving 1251 patients, covering 19 oral medication treatments and six non-oral medication treatments. NMA showed that deep brain stimulation (DBS) (SMD = -4.93; 95% CI: [-7.73, -2.13]), CX-8998 (SMD = -2.69; 95% CI: [-5.26, -0.14]), atenolol (SMD = -2.36; 95% CI: [-4.70, -0.10]), and propranolol (SMD = -1.59; 95% CI: [-2.25, -0.67]) showed relative efficacy compared to placebo, with DBS demonstrating relative efficacy compared to 15 other treatment methods. However, GRADE assessment indicated that the evidence level for these conclusions was "low" or "very low." According to SUCRA rankings, DBS (0.97) ranked first in relative efficacy, followed by CX-8998 (0.80), thalamotomy (0.79), atenolol (0.76), metoprolol (0.66), propranolol (0.64), magnetic resonance guided focus ultrasound (MR-FUS) (0.624), ICI-118551 (0.620), nimodipine (0.61) and phenobarbitone (0.59). In terms of safety, as a network graph could not be constructed, DBS and thalamotomy were excluded from the NMA, while other effective treatments showed no significant differences in safety compared to placebo.InterpretationOur study results indicate that CX-8998, propranolol, and atenolol demonstrate relative efficacy and safety in treating ET. DBS is effective for medication-resistant ET and ranks first in relative efficacy, though our NMA lacks safety data for DBS. Given the low overall grade of evidence, these results should be applied cautiously in clinical practice. Further large-scale, head-to-head RCTs are needed.FundingThis work was supported by grants from the National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 82271459).

Project description:ImportanceAntibiotic prophylaxis is widely used after surgical procedures operating on the mucosal tissues of the aerodigestive tract, but the optimal duration of these prophylactic therapies is often unclear.ObjectiveTo compare short-course antibiotic prophylaxis (≤24 hours) vs extended-course antibiotic prophylaxis (≥72 hours) after ear, nose, throat, and oral and maxillofacial surgery.Data sources and study selectionLiterature searches of PubMed were completed in October 2017 and included prospective trials that compared antibiotic prophylaxis courses of 24 hours or less vs 72 hours or more after ear, nose, throat, and oral and maxillofacial surgery. Some studies were also handpicked from reference lists of studies found with the initial search terms. All analysis was performed between September 2017 and October 2018.Data extraction and synthesisAll review stages were conducted in consensus by 2 reviewers. Data extraction and study quality assessment were performed with the Cochrane data extraction form and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used for reporting. The fixed-effects Mantel-Haenszel method was used for meta-analysis.Main outcomes and measuresRelative risk (RR) of surgical site infections, microbial origins of surgical site infections, adverse events, duration of hospital stay, and treatment costs.ResultsIncluded in the meta-analysis were 21 articles with a cumulative 1974 patients. In patients receiving 24 hours or shorter vs 72 hours or longer antibiotic prophylaxis regimens, no significant difference was found in the occurrence of postoperative infections in the pooled population (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.67-1.19), or in the ear, nose, throat (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.54-1.45), and oral and maxillofacial populations (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.63-1.21), separately. No heterogeneity was observed overall or in the subgroups. Patients receiving extended-course antibiotic prophylaxis were significantly more likely to develop adverse events unrelated to the surgical site (RR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.20-3.54).Conclusions and relevanceNo difference was found in the occurrence of postoperative infections between short-course and extended-course antibiotic prophylaxis after ear, nose, throat, and oral and maxillofacial surgery. Therefore, a short course of antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended unless documented conditions are present that would be best treated with an extended course. Using short-course antibiotics could avoid additional adverse events, antibiotic resistance development, and higher hospital costs. Future research should focus on identifying risk groups that might benefit from prolonged prophylaxis.

Dataset Information

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of the antibiotic treatment courses in AECOPD.

Publications

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of the antibiotic treatment courses in AECOPD.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets