The efficacy and safety of inhaled antibiotics for the treatment of bronchiectasis in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

医学 支气管扩张 恶化 荟萃分析 内科学 不利影响 呼吸道感染 重症监护医学 科克伦图书馆 随机对照试验 囊性纤维化 呼吸系统 病理 肺结核
作者
Irena F. Laska,Megan Crichton,Amelia Shoemark,James D. Chalmers
出处
期刊:The Lancet Respiratory Medicine [Elsevier]
卷期号:7 (10): 855-869 被引量:76
标识
DOI:10.1016/s2213-2600(19)30185-7
摘要

Summary

Background

Although use of inhaled antibiotics is the standard of care in cystic fibrosis, there is insufficient evidence to support use of inhaled antibiotics in patients with bronchiectasis not due to cystic fibrosis. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled antibiotics for the long-term treatment of adults with bronchiectasis and chronic respiratory tract infections.

Methods

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials of inhaled-antibiotic use in adult patients with bronchiectasis and chronic respiratory tract infections. Eligible publications were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomised controlled trials of inhaled antibiotics were included if the patients were adults with stable bronchiectasis diagnosed by CT or bronchography, the trials had treatment a duration of at least 4 weeks, and their outcomes met at least one of the endpoints of interest. Studies in cystic fibrosis were excluded. Efficacy endpoints assessed were bacterial load, bacterial eradication from sputum, frequency of exacerbations, time to first exacerbation, proportion of patients with at least one exacerbation, frequency of severe exacerbations, quality of life, change in FEV1, 6-min walk distance, mortality, adherence to treatment, and sputum volume; safety endpoints were adverse events and bacterial resistance in sputum. Each study was independently reviewed for methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool individual studies. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2. The review is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42019122892.

Findings

16 trials (n=2597 patients) were included for analysis. The mean reduction of colony forming units per g of sputum with inhaled antibiotics was −2·32 log units (95% CI −3·20 to −1·45; p<0·0001). Bacterial eradication was increased with inhaled antibiotic therapy (odds ratio [OR] 3·36, 1·63 to 6·91; p=0·0010). Inhaled antibiotics significantly reduced exacerbation frequency (rate ratio 0·81, 0·67 to 0·97; p=0·020). Time to first exacerbation was significantly prolonged with inhaled antibiotics (hazard ratio 0·83, 0·69 to 0·99; p=0·028). The proportion of patients with at least one exacerbation decreased (risk ratio 0·85, 0·74 to 0·97; p=0·015). There was a significant reduction in the frequency of severe exacerbations (rate ratio 0·43, 0·24 to 0·78; p=0·0050). The scores for neither the Quality of Life Bronchiectasis questionnaire nor St George's Respiratory Questionnaire improved above the minimal clinically important difference. The relative change in FEV1 was a deterioration of 0·87% predicted value (−2·00 to 0·26%; p=0·13). Other efficacy endpoints were reported in only few studies or had few events. There was no difference in treatment-emergent adverse effects (OR 0·97, 0·67 to 1·40; p=0·85) or bronchospasm (0·99, 0·66 to 1·48; p=0·95). Emergence of bacterial resistance was evident at the end of the treatment period (risk ratio 1·91, 1·46 to 2·49; p<0·0001).

Interpretation

Inhaled antibiotics are well tolerated, reduce bacterial load, and achieve a small but statistically significant reduction in exacerbation frequency without clinically significant improvements in quality of life in patients with bronchiectasis and chronic respiratory tract infections.

Funding

British Lung Foundation through the GSK/British Lung Foundation Chair of Respiratory Research and European Respiratory Society through the EMBARC2 consortium. EMBARC2 is supported by project partners Chiesi, Grifols, Insmed, Novartis, and Zambon.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
大幅提高文件上传限制,最高150M (2024-4-1)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
开心妍完成签到 ,获得积分10
刚刚
超级的小蚂蚁完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
rudjs完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
木子完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
Alaric完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
11秒前
哈哈大笑完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
www完成签到 ,获得积分10
15秒前
快递乱跑完成签到 ,获得积分10
17秒前
清秀人杰发布了新的文献求助10
17秒前
清风~徐来完成签到 ,获得积分10
18秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助DK-Ksss采纳,获得10
19秒前
董大米完成签到,获得积分10
21秒前
ZM完成签到 ,获得积分10
22秒前
22秒前
长鸢故里完成签到 ,获得积分10
22秒前
乏善可陈完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
baolong完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
Wgg完成签到 ,获得积分10
25秒前
27秒前
夜翼完成签到,获得积分10
31秒前
彭于晏应助神唐1采纳,获得10
31秒前
超级绫完成签到 ,获得积分10
31秒前
内向映天完成签到 ,获得积分10
34秒前
35秒前
思源应助youyouG采纳,获得10
38秒前
DK-Ksss发布了新的文献求助10
40秒前
黎明完成签到,获得积分10
41秒前
李子木完成签到 ,获得积分10
43秒前
49秒前
酷波er应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
50秒前
烟花应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
50秒前
50秒前
NexusExplorer应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
50秒前
脑洞疼应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
50秒前
50秒前
50秒前
50秒前
50秒前
深情安青应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
50秒前
高分求助中
Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 4 Volume Set (ASM Books) 13th Edition 1000
Teaching Social and Emotional Learning in Physical Education 900
Boris Pesce - Gli impiegati della Fiat dal 1955 al 1999 un percorso nella memoria 500
Chinese-English Translation Lexicon Version 3.0 500
Recherches Ethnographiques sue les Yao dans la Chine du Sud 500
Two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis reveals causal relationships between blood lipids and venous thromboembolism 500
[Lambert-Eaton syndrome without calcium channel autoantibodies] 460
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 有机化学 工程类 生物化学 纳米技术 物理 内科学 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 电极 光电子学 量子力学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 2396693
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 2098790
关于积分的说明 5289757
捐赠科研通 1826350
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 910542
版权声明 560017
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 486646