Antibiotic treatment for Clostridium difficile‐associated diarrhoea in adults

Background Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is recognized as a frequent cause of antibiotic‐associated diarrhoea and colitis. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review. Objectives The aim of this review is to investigate the efficacy and safety of antibiotic therapy for...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2017-03, Vol.2017 (3), p.CD004610
Hauptverfasser: Nelson, Richard L, Suda, Katie J, Evans, Charlesnika T
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is recognized as a frequent cause of antibiotic‐associated diarrhoea and colitis. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review. Objectives The aim of this review is to investigate the efficacy and safety of antibiotic therapy for C. difficile‐associated diarrhoea (CDAD), or C. difficile infection (CDI), being synonymous terms. Search methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Trials Register from inception to 26 January 2017. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov and clinicaltrialsregister.eu for ongoing trials. Selection criteria Only randomised controlled trials assessing antibiotic treatment for CDI were included in the review. Data collection and analysis Three authors independently assessed s and full text articles for inclusion and extracted data. The risk of bias was independently rated by two authors. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We pooled data using a fixed‐effect model, except where significant heterogeneity was detected, at which time a random‐effects model was used. The following outcomes were sought: sustained symptomatic cure (defined as initial symptomatic response and no recurrence of CDI), sustained bacteriologic cure, adverse reactions to the intervention, death and cost. Main results Twenty‐two studies (3215 participants) were included. The majority of studies enrolled patients with mild to moderate CDI who could tolerate oral antibiotics. Sixteen of the included studies excluded patients with severe CDI and few patients with severe CDI were included in the other six studies. Twelve different antibiotics were investigated: vancomycin, metronidazole, fusidic acid, nitazoxanide, teicoplanin, rifampin, rifaximin, bacitracin, cadazolid, LFF517, surotomycin and fidaxomicin. Most of the studies were active comparator studies comparing vancomycin with other antibiotics. One small study compared vancomycin to placebo. There were no other studies that compared antibiotic treatment to a placebo or a 'no treatment' control group. The risk of bias was rated as high for 17 of 22 included studies. Vancomycin was found to be more effective than metronidazole for achieving symptomatic cure. Seventy‐two per cent (318/444) of metronidazole patients achieved symptomatic cure compared to 79% (339/428) of vancomycin patients (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.97; moderate quali
ISSN:1465-1858
1469-493X
1465-1858
1469-493X
DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004610.pub5