Chinese medical journal · 2012
Gemifloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia and acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Lei, Wang Rui, Falagas Matthew E, Chen Liang-an, Liu You-ning
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gemifloxacin is a fluoroquinolone antibiotic with broad spectrum of antibacterial activity. The aim of the study was to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of gemifloxacin for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (AECB).
METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing gemifloxacin with other approved antibiotics. The PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, with no language restrictions.
RESULTS: Ten RCTs, comparing gemifloxacin with other quinolones (in 5 RCTs) and β-lactams and/or macrolides (in 5 RCTs), involving 3940 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, the treatment success was higher for gemifloxacin when compared with other antibiotics (odds ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.15 - 1.68 in intention-to-treat patients, and 1.33, 1.02 - 1.73 in clinically evaluable patients). There was no significant difference between the compared antibiotics regarding microbiological success (1.19, 0.84 - 1.68) or all-cause mortality (0.82, 0.41 - 1.63). The total drug related adverse events were similar for gemifloxacin when compared with other quinolones (0.89, 0.56 - 1.41), while lower when compared with β-lactams and/or macrolides (0.71, 0.57 - 0.89). In subgroup analyses, administration of gemifloxacin was associated with fewer cases of diarrhoea and more rashes compared with other antibiotics (0.66, 0.48 - 0.91, and 2.36, 1.18 - 4.74, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that gemifloxacin 320 mg oral daily is equivalent or superior to other approved antibiotics in effectiveness and safety for CAP and AECB. The development of rash represents potential limitation of gemifloxacin.
METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing gemifloxacin with other approved antibiotics. The PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, with no language restrictions.
RESULTS: Ten RCTs, comparing gemifloxacin with other quinolones (in 5 RCTs) and β-lactams and/or macrolides (in 5 RCTs), involving 3940 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, the treatment success was higher for gemifloxacin when compared with other antibiotics (odds ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.15 - 1.68 in intention-to-treat patients, and 1.33, 1.02 - 1.73 in clinically evaluable patients). There was no significant difference between the compared antibiotics regarding microbiological success (1.19, 0.84 - 1.68) or all-cause mortality (0.82, 0.41 - 1.63). The total drug related adverse events were similar for gemifloxacin when compared with other quinolones (0.89, 0.56 - 1.41), while lower when compared with β-lactams and/or macrolides (0.71, 0.57 - 0.89). In subgroup analyses, administration of gemifloxacin was associated with fewer cases of diarrhoea and more rashes compared with other antibiotics (0.66, 0.48 - 0.91, and 2.36, 1.18 - 4.74, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that gemifloxacin 320 mg oral daily is equivalent or superior to other approved antibiotics in effectiveness and safety for CAP and AECB. The development of rash represents potential limitation of gemifloxacin.