Search

Introduction: Aspiration pneumonia is increasingly recognised as a common condition. While antibiotics covering anaerobes are thought to be necessary based on old studies reporting anaerobes as causative organisms, recent studies suggest that it may not necessarily benefit prognosis, or even be harmful. Clinical practice should be based on current data reflecting the shift in causative bacteria. The aim of this review was to investigate whether anaerobic coverage is recommended in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing antibiotics with and without anaerobic coverage in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia was performed. The main outcome studied was mortality. Additional outcomes were resolution of pneumonia, development of resistant bacteria, length of stay, recurrence, and adverse effects. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Results: From an initial 2523 publications, one randomised control trial and two observational studies were selected. The studies did not show a clear benefit of anaerobic coverage. Upon meta-analysis, there was no benefit of anaerobic coverage in improving mortality (Odds ratio 1.23, 95% CI 0.67–2.25). Studies reporting resolution of pneumonia, length of hospital stay, recurrence of pneumonia, and adverse effects showed no benefit of anaerobic coverage. The development of resistant bacteria was not discussed in these studies. Conclusion: In the current review, there are insufficient data to assess the necessity of anaerobic coverage in the antibiotic treatment of aspiration pneumonia. Further studies are needed to determine which cases require anaerobic coverage, if any. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is unclear whether in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) beta-lactam plus macrolide antibiotics lead to better survival than beta-lactam alone. We report a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trials and observational studies published in English were included, if they provided sufficient data on odds ratio for all-cause mortality for a beta-lactam plus macrolide regimen compared with beta-lactam alone. Two investigators independently searched for eligible articles. Of 514 articles screened, 14 were included: two open-label randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 1975 patients, one non-RCT interventional study comprising 1011 patients and 11 observational studies comprising 33 332 patients. Random-model meta-analysis yielded an odds ratio for all-cause death for beta-lactam plus macrolide compared with beta-lactam alone of 0.80 (95% CI 0.69-0.92, P = 0.002) with substantial heterogeneity ( I2 = 59%, P for heterogeneity = 0.002). Severity-based subgroup analysis and meta-regression revealed that adding macrolide had a favourable effect on mortality only for severe CAP. Of the two RCTs, one suggested that macrolide plus beta-lactam lead to better outcome compared with beta-lactam alone, while the other did not. Subgrouping based on study design, that is, RCT versus non-RCT, which was almost identical to subgrouping based on severity, revealed substantial inter-subgroup heterogeneity. Compared with beta-lactam alone, beta-lactam plus macrolide may decrease all-cause death only for severe CAP. However, this conclusion is tentative because this was based mainly on observational studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses evaluated the efficacy and safety of adjunctive corticosteroids for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, the results from them had large discrepancies. The eligibility criteria for the current meta-analysis were original RCTs written in English as a full article that evaluated adjunctive systemic corticosteroids adding on antibiotic therapy targeting typical and/or atypical pathogen for treating hospitalized human CAP cases. Four investigators independently searched for eligible articles through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Random model was used. The heterogeneity among original studies and subgroups was evaluated with the I2 statistics. Of 54 articles that met the preliminary criteria, we found 10 eligible RCTs comprising 1780 cases. Our analyses revealed following pooled values by corticosteroids. OR for all-cause death: 0.80 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.53-1.21) from all studies; 0.41 (95% CI 0.19-0.90) from severe-case subgroup; 0.21 (95% CI 0.0-0.74) from intensive care unit (ICU) subgroup. Length of ICU stay: −1.30 days (95% CI (−3.04)−0.44). Length of hospital stay: −0.98 days (95% CI (−1.26)-(−0.71)). Length to clinical stability: −1.16 days (95% CI (−1.73)-(−0.58)). Serious complications do not seem to largely increase by steroids. In conclusion, adjunctive systemic corticosteroids for hospitalized patients with CAP seems preferred strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]