Orvosi hetilap · 2013
[Antimicrobial therapy of Clostridium difficile infection. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the scientific evidence].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Brodszky Valentin, Gulácsi László, Ludwig Endre, Prinz Gyula, Banai János, Reményi Péter, Strbák Bálint, Kertész Adrienne, Kopcsóné Németh Irén, Zsoldiné Urbán Edit, Baji Petra, Péntek Márta
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Clostridium difficile is the leading cause of antibiotic associated infectious nosocomial diarrhoea. Limited number of new pharmaceutical products have been developed and registered in the past decades for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection. The available scientific evidence is limited and hardly comparable.
AIM: To analyse the clinical efficacy and safety of metronidazole, vancomycin and fidaxomicin in the therapy of Clostridium difficile infection.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature data.
RESULTS: Meta-analysis of literature data showed no significant difference between these antibiotics in clinical cure endpoint (odss ratios: fidaxomicin vs. vancomycin 1.19; vancomycin vs. metronidazol 1.69 and fidaxomicin vs. metronidazol 2.00). However, fidaxomicin therapy was significantly more effective than vancomicin and metronidazol in endpoints of recurrence and global cure (odds ratios: fidaxomicin vs. vancomycin 0.47; vancomycin vs. metronidazol 0.91 és fidaxomicin vs. metronidazol 0.43). There was no significant difference between fidaxomicin, vancomycin and metronidazole in safety endpoints.
CONCLUSIONS: Each antibiotic similarly improved clinical cure. Fidaxomicin was the most effective therapeutic alternative in lowering the rate of recurrent Clostridium difficile infections.
AIM: To analyse the clinical efficacy and safety of metronidazole, vancomycin and fidaxomicin in the therapy of Clostridium difficile infection.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature data.
RESULTS: Meta-analysis of literature data showed no significant difference between these antibiotics in clinical cure endpoint (odss ratios: fidaxomicin vs. vancomycin 1.19; vancomycin vs. metronidazol 1.69 and fidaxomicin vs. metronidazol 2.00). However, fidaxomicin therapy was significantly more effective than vancomicin and metronidazol in endpoints of recurrence and global cure (odds ratios: fidaxomicin vs. vancomycin 0.47; vancomycin vs. metronidazol 0.91 és fidaxomicin vs. metronidazol 0.43). There was no significant difference between fidaxomicin, vancomycin and metronidazole in safety endpoints.
CONCLUSIONS: Each antibiotic similarly improved clinical cure. Fidaxomicin was the most effective therapeutic alternative in lowering the rate of recurrent Clostridium difficile infections.