Langkau ke kandungan utama

Teicoplanin versus vancomycin for proven or suspected infection

Pandangan anda amat bermakna

Kami menjalankan tinjauan ringkas untuk memahami penggunaan Ringkasan Bahasa Mudah Cochrane. Klik pautan ini untuk menyertai dan membantu penambahbaikan maklumat kesihatan.

One of the most common bacteria responsible for human diseases is Staphylococcus aureus, which causes mainly skin, lung and blood infections. In many cases, especially in infections acquired inside a hospital, usual antibiotics are ineffective and more aggressive drugs are needed. Teicoplanin and vancomycin are both effective against this bacteria, however, there is a concern that vancomycin may be more toxic, especially for the kidneys. This review identified 24 studies enrolling 2,610 patients comparing teicoplanin and vancomycin in those with either proven or suspected infection. Teicoplanin was as effective as vancomycin for treating infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus with similar results for clinical cure, microbiological cure and death. However, there were less adverse events (skin rash and red man syndrome) and it caused significantly less damage to the kidneys.

Latar Belakang

Vancomycin and teicoplanin are commonly used to treat gram-positive infections, particularly those caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). There is uncertainty regarding the effects of teicoplanin compared to vancomycin on kidney function with some previous studies suggesting teicoplanin is less nephrotoxic than vancomycin.

Matlamat

To investigate the efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin in patients with proven or suspected infection.

Kaedah Pencarian

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists of nephrology textbooks, review articles with relevant studies and sent letters seeking information about unpublished or incomplete studies to investigators involved in previous studies.

Kriteria Pemilihan

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in any language comparing teicoplanin to vancomycin for patients with proven or suspected infection.

Pengumpulan Data dan Analisis

Two authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted data using standardised data extraction forms. Study investigators were contacted for information not available in the original manuscripts. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Keputusan Utama

We included 24 studies (2,610 patients) in this review. Teicoplanin reduced the risk of nephrotoxicity compared to vancomycin (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90).The effects of teicoplanin or vancomycin were similar for clinical cure (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.08), microbiological cure (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03) and mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.79 to1.30). Six studies reported no cases of acute kidney injury (AKI) needing dialysis. Adverse events were less frequent with teicoplanin including cutaneous rash (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.92), red man syndrome (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.59) and total adverse events (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.00). A lower risk of nephrotoxicity with teicoplanin was observed in patients either with (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.88) or without aminoglycosides (RR 0.31, 95% 0.07 to 1.50), and also when vancomycin dosing was guided by serum levels (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.52).

Kesimpulan Pengarang

Teicoplanin and vancomycin are both effective in treating those with proven or suspected infection; however the incidence of adverse effects including nephrotoxicity was lower with teicoplanin. There were no cases of AKI needing dialysis. It remains unclear whether the differential effect on kidney function should influence which antibiotic be prescribed, although it may be reasonable to consider teicoplanin for patients at higher risk for AKI needing dialysis.

Petikan
Cavalcanti AB, Goncalves AR, Almeida CS, Bugano DDG, Silva E. Teicoplanin versus vancomycin for proven or suspected infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2022, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD007022. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007022.pub2.

Penggunaan cookie kami

Kami menggunakan cookie yang diperlukan untuk menjadikan laman web kami berfungsi. Kami juga ingin menetapkan cookie analitik pilihan untuk membantu kami memperbaikinya. Kami tidak akan menetapkan cookie pilihan melainkan anda mengaktifkannya. Menggunakan alat ini akan menetapkan cookie pada peranti anda untuk mengingati pilihan anda. Anda boleh menukar pilihan cookie anda pada bila-bila masa dengan menekan pautan 'Tetapan cookie' di bahagian bawah setiap halaman.
Untuk maklumat lebih terperinci mengenai cookie yang kami gunakan, lihat halaman halaman cookie.

Terima semua
Konfigurasikan