ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print January 23, 2008
Eur Respir J 2008, doi:10.1183/09031936.00109007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/5/1068    most recent
09031936.00109007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Permissions
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maimon, N.
Right arrow Articles by Marras, T.K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Maimon, N.
Right arrow Articles by Marras, T.K.


ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Antibacterial class not obviously important in outpatient pneumonia: a meta-analysis

N. Maimon 1, C. Nopmaneejumruslers 2, T.K. Marras 3*

1 Pulmonology Institute, Soroka Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel
2 Assistant professor of Medicine, Mahidol University, Dept of Medicine, Division of Ambulatory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand
3 Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of Toronto, Dept of Medicine, University Health Network and Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: ted.marras{at}utoronto.ca.


   Abstract

To systematically compare outcomes between antibiotic classes in treating outpatient community-acquired pneumonia, regarding antibacterials active against atypical organisms, or various antibacterial classes with similar atypical coverage.

Meta-analysis of randomized control trials of antibacterials for community-acquired pneumonia in outpatients at least 18 years old. Studies were independently reviewed two reviewers. We compared clinical success and mortality between different oral antibiotic classes and specifically compared antibacterials with atypical coverage (macrolides and fluoroquinolones) with others.

Thirteen eligible studies involving 4, 314 total patients were included. The quality of the studies was variable. Five studied macrolides and fluoroquinolones, three studied macrolides and beta-lactams, three studied fluoroquinolones and beta-lactams, and two studied cephalosporins versus beta lactams/ beta-lactamase inhibitors. There was no significant difference detected regarding clinical success or mortality regardless of atypical coverage, or between antibacterial classes with similar atypical coverage.

We could not demonstrate any advantage of specific antibacterials for mild community-acquired pneumonia in relatively healthy outpatients. The need for coverage of atypical pathogens in this setting is not apparent. In mild to moderate cases of outpatient-treated, community-acquired pneumonia, selecting antibacterials might be most appropriate according to side effects, patient preferences, availability, and cost.

Keywords:  Antibiotic, community-acquired pneumonia, outpatient, treatment




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ACCP Pulmonary Med Brd RevHome page
R. F. Grossman
Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Advances in Management
ACCP Pulmonary Med Brd Rev, January 1, 2009; 25(0): 359 - 368.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2008 by the European Respiratory Society.