Dataset Information

Short-Course Antibiotic Treatment Is Not Inferior to a Long-Course One in Acute Cholangitis: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

Our aim was to summarize the available literature on the effect of short- versus long-course antibiotic therapy on acute cholangitis.

Methods

A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA Statement. We searched three databases for papers discussing the length of ABT in acute cholangitis. Long and short therapy groups were defined based on the most recent guideline available at the time of publication of the articles. Primary outcomes were the rate of recurrent cholangitis and mortality; secondary outcomes included length of hospitalization and the duration of fever after ERCP. Data were extracted on these outcomes and on general characteristics. A narrative synthesis was then provided based on collected data.

Results

Out of 692 articles produced by our search, four met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. These contained 205 acute cholangitis patients, with 137 and 68 patients receiving short and long antibiotic therapy, respectively. No significant difference was observed in any of the studies on the outcomes of mortality and duration of fever after ERCP between the two groups. One out of four studies found the rate of recurrent cholangitis to be significantly lower in the short antibiotic therapy group (0.0% vs. 13.3%, p?=?0.036). Length of hospitalization was only compared in the same retrospective article, where it was found to be significantly shorter in the short-term antibiotic therapy group (with a median of 14 vs. 17.5 days, p?ConclusionsOur review suggests short-course antibiotic therapy is non-inferior to long-course treatment; however, several limitations underline the need for well-designed randomized trials.

SUBMITTER: Tinusz B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6514065 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Short-Course Antibiotic Treatment Is Not Inferior to a Long-Course One in Acute Cholangitis: A Systematic Review.

Tinusz Benedek B Szapáry László L Paládi Bence B Tenk Judit J Rumbus Zoltán Z Pécsi Dániel D Szakács Zsolt Z Varga Gábor G Rakonczay Zoltán Z Szepes Zoltán Z Czimmer József J Vincze Áron Á Hegyi Péter P Erőss Bálint B

Digestive diseases and sciences 20181027 2

<h4>Aims</h4>Our aim was to summarize the available literature on the effect of short- versus long-course antibiotic therapy on acute cholangitis.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA Statement. We searched three databases for papers discussing the length of ABT in acute cholangitis. Long and short therapy groups were defined based on the most recent guideline available at the time of publication of the articles. Primary outcomes were the rate of recurrent cho ...[more]

PMID: 30368681

Similar Datasets

Project description:What is known and objectiveGram-negative bacteremia remains a major health problem around the world. The optimal duration of antibiotic treatment has been poorly defined, and there are significant differences of opinion between clinicians. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of short-course and long-course treatments in patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia.MethodsWe searched public databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) to identify eligible studies. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the incidence of recurrent bacteremia through day 30. We used the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to evaluate the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-RCTs.Results and discussionSix studies involving 2689 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. No significant difference was found between short-course and long-course antibiotic treatments in 30-day mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.13; P = .26), 30-day recurrent bacteremia (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.68-1.67; P = .78), 90-day mortality (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.57-1.24; P = .38), 90-day recurrent bacteremia (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.50-1.89; P = .94), adverse events (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.89-1.45; P = .30), Clostridium difficile infection (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.40-1.86; P = .71) or resistance development (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.66-2.14; P = .57).What is new and conclusionShort-course was non-inferior to long-course antibiotic treatments for patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia. Considering the drug-related side effects and cost-effectiveness, a shorter duration of antibiotic treatment may be preferable for this particular population. However, additional high-quality RCTs are needed to further assess whether a shorter course of antibiotic treatment is of greater benefit for patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia.

Project description:BackgroundThe MOSAIC study compared moxifloxacin with three standard antibiotic regimens in patients with Anthonisen type 1 acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB). Further exploratory analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors of short and long term clinical outcomes and their value for clinical research.MethodsOutpatients aged > or =45 years were screened between AECB episodes, randomised to treatment upon presenting with an AECB, assessed 7-10 days after study treatment, and followed monthly until a new AECB or for up to 9 months. Logistic regression assessed the predictive factors for clinical cure (return to pre-AECB status) and clinical success (cure or improvement), and a stepwise Cox regression model time to a composite event (failure of study treatment, new AECB, or further antibiotic treatment for AECB).ResultsIn multivariate analyses, clinical cure was positively influenced by treatment with moxifloxacin (odds ratio (OR) 1.49; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.04) while cardiopulmonary disease (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.90), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) <50% predicted (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.67), and > or =4 AECBs in the previous year (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.97) predicted a poorer outcome. For clinical success, treatment with moxifloxacin had a positive influence (OR 1.57; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.41) while cardiopulmonary disease (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.68) and use of acute bronchodilators (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.84) predicted a poorer outcome. The occurrence of the composite event was influenced by antibiotic treatment (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98), age > or =65 years (HR 1.22; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.47), FEV1<50% predicted (HR 1.27; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.53), > or =4 AECBs in previous year (HR 1.63; 95% CI 1.34 to 1.99), and acute bronchodilator use (HR 1.48; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.87). For the composite event the beneficial effect of moxifloxacin was primarily seen in patients aged > or =65 years.ConclusionDespite selection of a homogeneous population of patients with chronic bronchitis, between group differences relating to antibiotic treatment could still be confounded by factors related to medical history, severity of disease, and use of concomitant medications. The design of future clinical trials should take these factors into account.

Project description:BackgroundCommunity-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a lung infection that can be acquired during day-to-day activities in the community (not while receiving care in a hospital). Community-acquired pneumonia poses a significant public health burden in terms of mortality, morbidity, and costs. Shorter antibiotic courses for CAP may limit treatment costs and adverse effects, but the optimal duration of antibiotic treatment is uncertain.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of short-course versus longer-course treatment with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage for CAP in non-hospitalised adolescents and adults (outpatients). We planned to investigate non-inferiority of short-course versus longer-term course treatment for efficacy outcomes, and superiority of short-course treatment for safety outcomes.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and three trials registers on 28 September 2017 together with conference proceedings, reference checking, and contact with experts and pharmaceutical companies.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short- and long-courses of the same antibiotic for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients.Data collection and analysisWe planned to use standard Cochrane methods.Main resultsOur searches identified 5260 records. We did not identify any RCTs that compared short- and longer-courses of the same antibiotic for the treatment of adolescents and adult outpatients with CAP.We excluded two RCTs that compared short courses (five compared to seven days) of the same antibiotic at the same daily dose because they evaluated antibiotics (gemifloxacin and telithromycin) not commonly used in practice for the treatment of CAP. In particular, gemifloxacin is no longer approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate CAP due to its questionable risk-benefit balance, and reported adverse effects. Moreover, the safety profile of telithromycin is also cause for concern.We found one ongoing study that we will assess for inclusion in future updates of the review.Authors' conclusionsWe found no eligible RCTs that studied a short-course of antibiotic compared to a longer-course (with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage) for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients. The effects of antibiotic therapy duration for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients remains unclear.

Project description:Antibiotics are the major tool for treating bacterial infections. Rising antibiotic resistance, however, calls for a better use of antibiotics. While classical recommendations favor long and aggressive treatments, more recent clinical trials advocate for moderate regimens. In this debate, two axes of 'aggression' have typically been conflated: treatment intensity (dose) and treatment duration. The third dimension of treatment timing along each individual's infection course has rarely been addressed. By using a generic mathematical model of bacterial infection controlled by immune response, we examine how the relative effectiveness of antibiotic treatment varies with its timing, duration and antibiotic kill rate. We show that short or long treatments may both be beneficial depending on treatment onset, the target criterion for success and on antibiotic efficacy. This results from the dynamic trade-off between immune response build-up and resistance risk in acute, self-limiting infections, and uncertainty relating symptoms to infection variables. We show that in our model early optimal treatments tend to be 'short and strong', while late optimal treatments tend to be 'mild and long'. This suggests a shift in the aggression axis depending on the timing of treatment. We find that any specific optimal treatment schedule may perform more poorly if evaluated by other criteria, or under different host-specific conditions. Our results suggest that major advances in antibiotic stewardship must come from a deeper empirical understanding of bacterial infection processes in individual hosts. To guide rational therapy, mathematical models need to be constrained by data, including a better quantification of personal disease trajectory in humans. Lay summary: Bacterial infections are becoming more difficult to treat worldwide because bacteria are becoming resistant to the antibiotics used. Addressing this problem requires a better understanding of how treatment along with other host factors impact antibiotic resistance. Until recently, most theoretical research has focused on the importance of antibiotic dosing on antibiotic resistance, however, duration and timing of treatment remain less explored. Here, we use a mathematical model of a generic bacterial infection to study three aspects of treatment: treatment dose/efficacy (defined by the antibiotic kill rate), duration, and timing, and their impact on several infection endpoints. We show that short and long treatment success strongly depends on when treatment begins (defined by the symptom threshold), the target criterion to optimize, and on antibiotic efficacy. We find that if administered early in an infection, "strong and short" therapy performs better, while if treatment begins at higher bacterial densities, a "mild and long" course of antibiotics is favored. In the model host immune defenses are key in preventing relapses, controlling antibiotic resistant bacteria and increasing the effectiveness of moderate intervention. In order to improve rational treatments of human infections, we call for a better quantification of individual disease trajectories in bacteria-immunity space.

Project description:BackgroundMost serious complications of infective endocarditis (IE) appear in the so-called "critical phase" of the disease, which represents the first days after diagnosis. The majority of patients overcoming the acute phase has a favorable outcome, yet they remain hospitalized for a long period of time mainly to complete antibiotic therapy. The major hypothesis of this trial is that in patients with clinically stable IE and adequate response to antibiotic treatment, without signs of persistent infection, periannular complications or metastatic foci, a shorter antibiotic time period would be as efficient and safe as the classic 4 to 6 weeks antibiotic regimen.MethodsMulticenter, prospective, randomized, controlled open-label, phase IV clinical trial with a non-inferiority design to evaluate the efficacy of a short course (2 weeks) of parenteral antibiotic therapy compared with conventional antibiotic therapy (4-6 weeks).Samplepatients with IE caused by gram-positive cocci, having received at least 10 days of conventional antibiotic treatment, and at least 7 days after surgery when indicated, without clinical, analytical, microbiological or echocardiographic signs of persistent infection. Estimated sample size: 298 patients.InterventionControl group: standard duration antibiotic therapy, (4 to 6 weeks) according to ESC guidelines recommendations. Experimental group: short-course antibiotic therapy for 2 weeks. The incidence of the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, unplanned cardiac surgery, symptomatic embolisms and relapses within 6 months after the inclusion in the study will be prospectively registered and compared.ConclusionsSATIE will investigate whether a two weeks short-course of intravenous antibiotics in patients with IE caused by gram-positive cocci, without signs of persistent infection, is not inferior in safety and efficacy to conventional antibiotic treatment (4-6 weeks).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04222257 (January 7, 2020). EudraCT 2019-003358-10.

Dataset Information

Short-Course Antibiotic Treatment Is Not Inferior to a Long-Course One in Acute Cholangitis: A Systematic Review.

Aims

Methods

Results

Publications

Short-Course Antibiotic Treatment Is Not Inferior to a Long-Course One in Acute Cholangitis: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets