首页> 外文期刊>Infection and Drug Resistance >The efficacy and safety of ceftaroline in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in pediatric patients – a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
【24h】

The efficacy and safety of ceftaroline in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in pediatric patients – a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

机译:头孢洛林治疗小儿急性细菌感染的有效性和安全性–随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Objectives: This meta-analysis aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of ceftaroline in treating acute bacterial infections – community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and skin and skin structure infection (SSSI) in pediatric patients. Methods: The Pubmed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov. and the Cochrane databases were searched up to December 31, 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ceftaroline and other comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in pediatric patients were included. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate and the secondary outcome was the risk of adverse event. Results: Three RCTs were included. Overall, ceftaroline had a clinical cure rate at end of therapy (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) similar to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection (at EOT, OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 0.88–4.25, Isup2/sup =0%, and at TOC, OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.64–2.91, Isup2/sup =14%). In addition, ceftaroline had a clinical failure rate at EOT and TOC similar to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection (at EOT, OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.22–1.76, Isup2/sup =0%, and at TOC, OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.24–1.91, Isup2/sup =0%). No significant differences were found for the risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in all and different degrees between ceftaroline and comparators (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.37–1.78, Isup2/sup =56%). The risks of TEAE and severe adverse events related to study drug were similar between ceftaroline and comparators (TEAE related to study drug, OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.52–1.82, Isup2/sup =0%, severe adverse event related to study drug, OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.22–5.44, Isup2/sup =22%). Conclusions: The clinical efficacy of ceftaroline is as good as comparator therapy in the treatment of acute bacterial infections – CAP and SSSI, and this antibiotic is well tolerated as the comparators.
机译:目的:这项荟萃分析旨在评估头孢洛林在儿科患者急性细菌感染(社区获得性肺炎(CAP)和皮肤及皮肤结构感染(SSSI))中的临床疗效和安全性。方法:Pubmed,Embase,ClinicalTrials.gov。并检索截至2018年12月31日的Cochrane数据库。仅包括评估头孢洛林和其他比较剂在儿科患者急性细菌感染治疗中的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结果是临床治愈率,次要结果是不良事件的风险。结果:包括三个RCT。总体而言,头孢洛林治疗急性细菌感染的治疗结束时的临床治愈率(EOT)和治愈测试(TOC)与比较者相似(EOT或OR为1.93; 95%CI为0.88-4.25,I < sup> 2 = 0%,在TOC时,OR为1.36; 95%CI为0.64-2.91,I 2 = 14%)。此外,ceftaroline在急性细菌感染的治疗中,在EOT和TOC上的临床失败率与比较者相似(在EOT时,OR为0.62; 95%CI为0.22-1.76,I 2 = 0 %,并且在TOC时,OR为0.68; 95%CI为0.24-1.91,I 2 = 0%)。头孢洛林与比较者之间不同程度的治疗紧急不良事件(TEAE)风险均无显着差异(OR,0.81; 95%CI,0.37–1.78,I 2 = 56 %)。头孢洛林和比较者之间TEAE的风险和与研究药物有关的严重不良事件相似(TEAE与研究药物有关,OR,0.98; 95%CI,0.52-1.82,I 2 = 0%,与研究药物相关的严重不良事件,OR为1.09; 95%CI为0.22-5.44,I 2 = 22%)。结论:ceftaroline在治疗急性细菌感染CAP和SSSI方面的临床疗效与对照治疗药相当,并且该抗生素作为对照药具有良好的耐受性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号