利奈唑胺与万古霉素对MRSA随机对照试验的治疗效果及安全性的Meta分析

李颖 唐惠林 胡永芳 彭芳辰

中国药学杂志 ›› 2011, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (13) : 1041-1045.

PDF(2522 KB)
PDF(2522 KB)
中国药学杂志 ›› 2011, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (13) : 1041-1045.
药物与临床

利奈唑胺与万古霉素对MRSA随机对照试验的治疗效果及安全性的Meta分析

  • 李颖1,2,唐惠林1,胡永芳1*,彭芳辰2
作者信息 +

Effects and Safety of Linezolid vs. Vancomycin for the Treatment of Patients with MRSA:Meta Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

  • LI Ying1,2,TANG Hui-lin1,HU Yong-fang1*,PENG Fang-chen2
Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

目的 比较利奈唑胺与万古霉素对耐甲氧西林金黄色葡菌感染的治疗效果及安全性。方法 计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、MEDLINE、EMbase、PUBMED、中国科技期刊全文数据库、维普电子期刊全文数据库、万方数据库等文献数据库以及手工检索相关会议的论文集,采用RevMan 5.0进行Meta分析。结果 纳入研究12项,共3 405例患者。Meta分析结果示,利奈唑胺治疗组的临床生存率明显长于万古霉素对照组[OR=1.71,95%CI(1.23,2.37),P=0.002],亚组分析表明,MRSA肺炎感染治疗组也比对照组明显长[OR=1.94,95%CI(1.34,2.81),P=0.0004];临床治愈率高于万古霉素组,两者有统计学差异[OR=1.57,95%CI(1.08,2.28),P<0.05];细菌清除率高于万古霉素对照组,两者有统计学差异[OR=2.03,95%CI(1.12,3.66),P<0.05],其中亚组分析示利奈唑胺治疗皮肤及软组织感染或手术部位感染者优于万古霉素(P<0.05);而不良反应发生率,两者没有显著性差异[OR=1.10,95%CI(0.92,1.31),P﹥0.05]。结论 利奈唑胺治疗效果优于万古霉素,安全性方面相似,肾毒性较小,在治疗危重病人或肾功能不全者可能获益更多。

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To compare the effects and safety of linezolid and vancomycin for the treatment of patients with MRSA. METHODS Cochrane library,MEDLINE,Embase,PUBMED,CNKI,VIP database,Wanfang database and paper manual of related conferences were searched. Then Meta analysis were performed by RevMan 5.0. RESULTS Twelve studies were included (n=3 405). The analysis indicated that there were significant differences between linezolid and vancomycin in survival rate[OR=1.7195%CI (1.23,2.37),P=0.002],especially for MRSA pneumonia[OR=1.94,95%CI (1.34,2.81),P=0.000 4],clinical cure rate[OR=1.57,95%CI (1.08,2.28),P<0.05] and microbiological cure rate[OR=2.03,95%CI (1.12,3.66),P<0.05],especially for the SSTI or SSI. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the adverse event rate[OR=1.10,95%CI(0.92,1.31),P﹥0.05]. CONCLUSION With superior effects,similar safety,better tolerability and less toxicity,linezolid may be preferred for the patients with critical illness and renal dysfunction.

关键词

利奈唑胺 / 万古霉素 / 耐甲氧西林金葡菌感染 / 随机对照试验 / 系统评价

Key words

linezolid / vancomycin / MRSA infection / randomized controlled trials / meta analysis

引用本文

导出引用
李颖 唐惠林 胡永芳 彭芳辰. 利奈唑胺与万古霉素对MRSA随机对照试验的治疗效果及安全性的Meta分析[J]. 中国药学杂志, 2011, 46(13): 1041-1045
LI Ying;TNG Hui-lin;HU Yong-fng;PENG Fng-chen. Effects and Safety of Linezolid vs. Vancomycin for the Treatment of Patients with MRSA:Meta Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials[J]. Chinese Pharmaceutical Journal, 2011, 46(13): 1041-1045

参考文献


[1] ZHU D M,WANG F, ZHANG Y Y. Surveillance of bacterial resistance in hospitals of Shanghai during 2005[J]. Chin J Infect Chemother (中国感染与化疗杂志),2006,6 (6): 371-378.
[2] WANG H,SUN H L CHEN M J,et al. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance of gram-positive cocci isolated from 5 teaching hospitals in China in 2005[J]. Chin J Lab Med (中华检验医学杂志),2006,29 (10) :873-878.
[3] FALAGAS M E,KASTORIS A C,KAPASKELIS A M. Fosfomycin for the treatment of multidrug-resistant,including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing,Enterobacteriaceae infections: a systematic review[J]. Lancet Infect Dis,2010,10(1): 43-50.
[4] SHORR A F,KUNKEL M J, KOLLEF M. Linezolid versus vancomycin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: pooled analysis of randomized studies[J]. J Antimicro Chem,2005,56(5): 923-929.
[5] STEVENS D L,HERR D,LAMPIRIS H,et al. Linezolid versus Vancomycin for the treatment of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus infection[J]. Clin Infect Dis,2002,34(11): 1481-1490.
[6] RUBINSTEIN E,CAMMARATA S,OLIPHANT T,et al. Linezolid (PNU-100766) versus Vancomycin in the treatment of hospitalized patients with nosocomial pneumonia: A randomized,double-blind,multicenter Study[J]. Clin Infect Dis,2001,32(3): 402-412.
[7] WEIGELT J,KAAFARANI H,ITANI K,et al. Linezolid eradicates MRSA better than vancomycin from surgical-site infection[J]. Am J Surg,2004,188(6): 760-766.
[8] WEIGELT J,ITANI K,STEVENS D,et al. Linezolid versus vancomycin in treatment of complicated skin and soft tissu infections[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother,2005,49(6):2260-2266.
[9] KAPLAN S L,AFGHANI B,LOPEZ P,et al. Linezolid for the treatment of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus infections in children[J]. Pediatr Infecy Dis J,2003,22 (9 suppl): 178-185.
[10] KOHNO S,YAMAGUCHI K,AIKAWA N,et al. Linezolid versus vancomycin for the treatment of infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Japan[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother,2007,60(6): 1361-1369.
[11] KOLLEF M H,RELLO J,CAMMARATA S K,et al. Clinical cure and survival in Gram-positive ventilator-associated pneumonia: retrospective analysis of two double-blind studies comparing linezolid with vancomycin[J]. Intensive Care Med,2004,30(3):338-394.
[12] WUNDERINK R G,CAMMARATA S K,OLIPHANT T H,et al. Continuation of a randomized,double- blind,multicenter study of linezolid versue vancomycin in the treatment of patients with nosocomial pneumonia[J]. Clin Ther, 2003,25(3):980-992.
[13] WUNDERINK R G,RELLO J,CAMMARATA S K,et al. Linezolid vs Vancomycin: Analysis of two double-bline studies of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia[J]. Chest,2003,124(5):1789-1797.
[14] SHARP J N,SHIVELY E H,POLK H C. Clinical and economic outcomes of oral linezolid versus intravenous vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA-complicated,lower-extremity skin and soft-tissue infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus[J]. Am J Surg,2005,189(4): 425-428.
[15] FALAGAS M E,SIEMPOS I,VARDAKAS K Z. Linezolid versus glycopeptide or β-lactam for treatment of Gram-positive bacterial infections: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Lancet Infect Dis,2008,8(1): 53-66.
PDF(2522 KB)

67

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/