To treat or not to treat: adjunctive antibiotics for uncomplicated abscesses.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Spellberg B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3074575 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
To treat or not to treat: adjunctive antibiotics for uncomplicated abscesses.
Spellberg Brad B Boucher Helen H Bradley John J Das Anita A Talbot George G
Annals of emergency medicine 20110201 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the impact of adjunctive antibiotic therapy on uncomplicated skin abscesses. DESIGN:Systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES:Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov. STUDY SELECTION:A BMJ Rapid Recommendation panel provided input on design, important outcomes and the interpretation of the results. Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) included a comparison of antibiotics against no antibiotics or a comparison of different antibiotics in patients with uncomplicated skin abscesses, and reported outcomes prespecified by the linked guideline panel. REVIEW METHODS:Reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts for eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed random-effects meta-analyses that compared antibiotics with no antibiotics, along with a limited number of prespecified subgroup hypotheses. We also performed network meta-analysis with a Bayesian framework to compare effects of different antibiotics. Quality of evidence was assessed with The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS:Fourteen RCTs including 4198 patients proved eligible. Compared with no antibiotics, antibiotics probably lower the risk of treatment failure (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.90; low quality), recurrence within 1 month (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.77; moderate quality), hospitalisation (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.94; moderate quality) and late recurrence (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.85; moderate quality). However, relative to no use, antibiotics probably increase the risk of gastrointestinal side effects (trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX): OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.58; moderate quality; clindamycin: OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.88; high quality) and diarrhoea (clindamycin: OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.50 to 4.89; high quality). Cephalosporins did not reduce the risk of treatment failure compared with placebo (moderate quality). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with uncomplicated skin abscesses, moderate-to-high quality evidence suggests TMP-SMX or clindamycin confer a modest benefit for several important outcomes, but this is offset by a similar risk of adverse effects. Clindamycin has a substantially higher risk of diarrhoea than TMP-SMX. Cephalosporins are probably not effective.
| S-EPMC5829937 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5799894 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrimary appendectomy is the current standard of care for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis, but interest in conservative treatment with antibiotics alone has been increasing in recent years. Clinical trials so far have shown controversial results.MethodsA series of meta-analyses were reviewed. Studies comparing surgery versus antibiotics alone for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults were included. Descriptive statistics and data on treatment effects were retrieved and summarized.ResultsThe conservative approach has a success rate of around 60 % and is associated with shorter pain duration, reduced analgesic medication, faster resolution of the inflammation process, lower expenses and quicker return to work. On the other hand, medical treatment leads to high (up to 20 %) readmission rates and more often requires surgery. An operative approach is associated with higher treatment success rates (>90 %) and very a low mortality rate.ConclusionBased on the current body of evidence, the use of antibiotics for primary treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis cannot be routinely recommended. Appendectomy remains the gold-standard treatment.
| S-EPMC4628279 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9216234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify the variables that predict the failure to treat amoebic liver abscesses.MethodsWe prospectively carried out a case-control study on a cohort of patients who had been diagnosed with amoebic liver abscesses using clinical, ultrasonic, and serologic methods. Patients with pyogenic abscesses, negative ELISA tests for amoebiasis, immunosuppression status, or previous abdominal surgery were excluded. All patients received metronidazole, and those who demonstrated 4 days of unfavorable clinical responses received percutaneous or surgical draining of the abscess. Demographic, laboratory, and ultrasonographic characteristics were assessed as prognostic indications of failure.ResultsOf 40 patients with amoebic liver abscess, 24 (mean age: 36·7±11·2 years) responded to medical treatment and 16 (41·8±11·6 years) required drainage, including 14 patients who underwent percutaneous drainage and two patients who required surgery. The albumin level, abscess volume, abscess diameter, and alkaline phosphatase level were all statistically significant (P<0·05) on the bivariate analysis. The highest (>99%) sensitivity and negative predictive value were observed for an abscess volume >500 ml and diameter >10 cm, while the best specificity and positive predictive value were achieved with the combination of low serum albumin level, high alkaline phosphatase level, and large abscess volume or diameter.ConclusionsThe prognostic indications of the failure to treat amoebic liver abscesses include low albumin, high alkaline phosphatase, and large abscess volume or diameter. The combination of these variables is a useful and easy tool for determining appropriate therapy.
| S-EPMC4001590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUncomplicated skin abscesses are common, yet the appropriate management of the condition in the era of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is unclear.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, prospective, double-blind trial involving outpatient adults and children. Patients were stratified according to the presence of a surgically drainable abscess, abscess size, the number of sites of skin infection, and the presence of nonpurulent cellulitis. Participants with a skin abscess 5 cm or smaller in diameter were enrolled. After abscess incision and drainage, participants were randomly assigned to receive clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), or placebo for 10 days. The primary outcome was clinical cure 7 to 10 days after the end of treatment.ResultsWe enrolled 786 participants: 505 (64.2%) were adults and 281 (35.8%) were children. A total of 448 (57.0%) of the participants were male. S. aureus was isolated from 527 participants (67.0%), and MRSA was isolated from 388 (49.4%). Ten days after therapy in the intention-to-treat population, the cure rate among participants in the clindamycin group was similar to that in the TMP-SMX group (221 of 266 participants [83.1%] and 215 of 263 participants [81.7%], respectively; P=0.73), and the cure rate in each active-treatment group was higher than that in the placebo group (177 of 257 participants [68.9%], P<0.001 for both comparisons). The results in the population of patients who could be evaluated were similar. This beneficial effect was restricted to participants with S. aureus infection. Among the participants who were initially cured, new infections at 1 month of follow-up were less common in the clindamycin group (15 of 221, 6.8%) than in the TMP-SMX group (29 of 215 [13.5%], P=0.03) or the placebo group (22 of 177 [12.4%], P=0.06). Adverse events were more frequent with clindamycin (58 of 265 [21.9%]) than with TMP-SMX (29 of 261 [11.1%]) or placebo (32 of 255 [12.5%]); all adverse events resolved without sequelae. One participant who received TMP-SMX had a hypersensitivity reaction.ConclusionsAs compared with incision and drainage alone, clindamycin or TMP-SMX in conjunction with incision and drainage improves short-term outcomes in patients who have a simple abscess. This benefit must be weighed against the known side-effect profile of these antimicrobials. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00730028 .).
| S-EPMC6886470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Empiric antibiotics are often used in combination with mechanical debridement to treat patients suffering from periodontitis and to eliminate disease-associated pathogens. Until now, only a few next generation sequencing 16S rDNA amplicon based publications with rather small sample sizes studied the effect of those interventions on the subgingival microbiome. Therefore, we studied subgingival samples of 89 patients with chronic periodontitis (solely non-smokers) before and two months after therapy. Forty-seven patients received mechanical periodontal therapy only, whereas 42 patients additionally received oral administered amoxicillin plus metronidazole (500 and 400 mg, respectively; 3x/day for 7 days). Samples were sequenced with Illumina MiSeq 300 base pairs paired end technology (V3 and V4 hypervariable regions of the 16S rDNA). Inter-group differences before and after therapy of clinical variables (percentage of sites with pocket depth ≥ 5mm, percentage of sites with bleeding on probing) and microbiome variables (diversity, richness, evenness, and dissimilarity) were calculated, a principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) was conducted, and differential abundance of agglomerated ribosomal sequence variants (aRSVs) classified on genus level was calculated using a negative binomial regression model. We found statistically noticeable decreased richness, and increased dissimilarity in the antibiotic, but not in the placebo group after therapy. The PCoA revealed a clear compositional separation of microbiomes after therapy in the antibiotic group, which could not be seen in the group receiving mechanical therapy only. This difference was even more pronounced on aRSV level. Here, adjunctive antibiotics were able to induce a microbiome shift by statistically noticeably reducing aRSVs belonging to genera containing disease-associated species, e.g., Porphyromonas, Tannerella, Treponema, and Aggregatibacter, and by noticeably increasing genera containing health-associated species. Mechanical therapy alone did not statistically noticeably affect any disease-associated taxa. Despite the difference in microbiome modulation both therapies improved the tested clinical parameters after two months. These results cast doubt on the relevance of the elimination and/or reduction of disease-associated taxa as a main goal of periodontal therapy.
| S-EPMC5906003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the widespread use and availability of rapidly acting anti-malarials, the fatality rate of severe malaria in sub-Saharan Africa remains high. Adjunctive therapies that target the host response to malaria infection may further decrease mortality over that of anti-malarial agents alone. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonists (e.g. rosiglitazone) have been shown to act on several pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of severe malaria and may improve clinical outcome as an adjunctive intervention.MethodsIn this study, the safety and tolerability of adjunctive rosiglitazone in paediatric uncomplicated malaria infection was evaluated in Mozambique, as a prelude to its evaluation in a randomized controlled trial in paediatric severe malaria. The study was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIa trial of rosiglitazone (0.045 mg/kg/dose) twice daily for 4 days versus placebo as adjunctive treatment in addition to Mozambican standard of care (artemisinin combination therapy Coartem®) in children with uncomplicated malaria. The primary outcomes were tolerability and safety, including clinical, haematological, biochemical, and electrocardiographic evaluations.ResultsThirty children were enrolled: 20 were assigned to rosiglitazone and 10 to placebo. Rosiglitazone treatment did not induce hypoglycaemia nor significantly alter clinical, biochemical, haematological, or electrocardiographic parameters.ConclusionsAdjunctive rosiglitazone was safe and well-tolerated in children with uncomplicated malaria, permitting the extension of its evaluation as adjunctive therapy for severe malaria. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02694874.
| S-EPMC5442675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRecently, antibiotics use in uncomplicated acute diverticulitis (AD) has been controversial in Europe. The American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) in their 2015 guidelines recommend their selective use. Our study highlights their role in outpatient management.MethodsWe queried the Diamond Network through TriNetX-Research Network including 92 healthcare organizations. We included large intestine diverticulitis without perforation, abscess or bleeding. Exclusion criteria included any of sepsis criteria, CRP > 15 mg/L, immunodeficiency or HIV, coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, history of Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis, heart failure, hypertension, diabetes or any of the following in the 3 months before study date; clostridium difficile (C. diff) infection, diverticulitis or antibiotics. Patients with AD were divided into two cohorts; patients on antibiotics, and patients not on antibiotics. Cohorts were compared after propensity-score matching (PSM).Results214,277 patients met inclusion criteria. 58.9% received antibiotics, and 41% did not. After PSM, both cohorts had 84,320. Rate of hospital admission was lower in the antibiotic group (3.3% vs 4.2%, p < .001). There was a statistical difference between ICU admission (0.1% vs 0.15%, p < .01) and the rate of bowel perforation, peritonitis, abscess formation or bleeding (1.3% vs 1.4%, p = .044). There was no difference in mortality (0.1% vs 0.1%, p = .11), C. diff (0.1% vs 0.1%, p = .9), colectomies (0.2% vs 0.2%, p = .33), or Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) (0.1% vs 0.1%, p = .28).ConclusionOutpatient use of antibiotics in patients with uncomplicated AD is associated with lower rates of hospital admissions and complications without changing mortality rate or surgical intervention.
| S-EPMC11427943 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Inhaled antibiotics have been used as adjunctive therapy for patients with pneumonia, primarily caused by multidrug resistant (MDR) pathogens. Most studies have been in ventilated patients, although non-ventilated patients have also been included (but not discussed in this review), and most patients have had nosocomial pneumonia. Aerosolized antibiotics are generally added to systemic therapy, and have shown efficacy, primarily as salvage therapy for failing patients and as adjunctive therapy after an MDR gram-negative has been identified. An advantage to aerosolized antibiotics is that they can achieve high intra-pulmonary concentrations that are potentially effective, even for highly resistant pathogens, and because they are generally not well-absorbed systemically, it is possible to avoid some of the toxicities of systemic therapy. When using inhaled antibiotics, it is essential to choose the appropriate agent and the optimal delivery method. Animal and human studies have shown that aerosolized antibiotics reach higher concentrations in the lung than systemic antibiotics, but that areas of dense pneumonia may not receive as much antibiotic as less affected areas of lung. Optimal delivery in ventilated patients depends on device selection, generally with a preference for vibrating mesh nebulizers and with careful attention to where the device is placed in the ventilator circuit and how the delivery is coordinated with the ventilator cycle. Although some studies have shown a benefit for clinical cure, adjunctive therapy has not led to reduced mortality. In some studies, adjunctive aerosol therapy has reduced the duration of systemic antibiotic therapy, thus serving to promote antimicrobial stewardship. Two recent multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive nebulized antibiotics for VAP patients with suspected MDR gram-negative pneumonia were negative for their primary endpoints. This may have been related to trial design and execution and the lessons learned from these studies need to be incorporated in any future trials. Currently, routine use of adjunctive aerosolized therapy cannot be supported by available data, and this therapy is only recommended to assist in the eradication of highly resistant pathogens and to be used as salvage therapy for patients failing systemic therapy.
| S-EPMC6517749 | biostudies-literature