UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Bacteriostatic versus bactericidal antibiotics for patients with serious bacterial infections: systematic review and meta-analysis


Nemeth, Johannes; Oesch, Gabriela; Kuster, Stefan P (2015). Bacteriostatic versus bactericidal antibiotics for patients with serious bacterial infections: systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 70(2):382-395.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Antibiotics are commonly classified into bactericidal and bacteriostatic agents based on their antimicrobial action. We aimed to assess whether this distinction is clinically relevant. METHODS OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and relevant references and conference proceedings using the Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing bactericidal with bacteriostatic antibiotics for treatment of severe infections. Main outcome measures were clinical cure rates and overall mortality. Abstracts of studies selected in the database search were screened by one reviewer; full-text screening and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. RESULTS Thirty-three studies were included. Approximately half of patients were treated with bacteriostatic monotherapy. Infections covered were pneumonia (n = 13), skin and soft tissue infections (n = 8), intra-abdominal infections (n = 4) and others (n = 8). Neither clinical cure rates [risk ratio (RR), 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.01; P = 0.11] nor mortality rates (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76-1.08; P = 0.28) were different between patients treated with bactericidal drugs and those treated with bacteriostatic drugs. Subgroup analyses showed a benefit for clinical cure rates associated with linezolid and increased mortality associated with tigecycline. In meta-regression, clinical cure rates remained higher in patients treated with linezolid (P = 0.01); tigecycline displayed a close to significant association with increased mortality (P = 0.05) if compared with other bacteriostatic agents. CONCLUSIONS The categorization of antibiotics into bacteriostatic and bactericidal is unlikely to be relevant in clinical practice if used for abdominal infections, skin and soft tissue infections and pneumonia. Because we were not able to include studies on meningitis, endocarditis or neutropenia, no conclusion regarding these diseases can be drawn.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Antibiotics are commonly classified into bactericidal and bacteriostatic agents based on their antimicrobial action. We aimed to assess whether this distinction is clinically relevant. METHODS OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and relevant references and conference proceedings using the Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing bactericidal with bacteriostatic antibiotics for treatment of severe infections. Main outcome measures were clinical cure rates and overall mortality. Abstracts of studies selected in the database search were screened by one reviewer; full-text screening and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. RESULTS Thirty-three studies were included. Approximately half of patients were treated with bacteriostatic monotherapy. Infections covered were pneumonia (n = 13), skin and soft tissue infections (n = 8), intra-abdominal infections (n = 4) and others (n = 8). Neither clinical cure rates [risk ratio (RR), 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.01; P = 0.11] nor mortality rates (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76-1.08; P = 0.28) were different between patients treated with bactericidal drugs and those treated with bacteriostatic drugs. Subgroup analyses showed a benefit for clinical cure rates associated with linezolid and increased mortality associated with tigecycline. In meta-regression, clinical cure rates remained higher in patients treated with linezolid (P = 0.01); tigecycline displayed a close to significant association with increased mortality (P = 0.05) if compared with other bacteriostatic agents. CONCLUSIONS The categorization of antibiotics into bacteriostatic and bactericidal is unlikely to be relevant in clinical practice if used for abdominal infections, skin and soft tissue infections and pneumonia. Because we were not able to include studies on meningitis, endocarditis or neutropenia, no conclusion regarding these diseases can be drawn.

Citations

11 citations in Web of Science®
10 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Infectious Diseases
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:February 2015
Deposited On:04 Mar 2015 17:10
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 18:52
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN:0305-7453
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dku379
PubMed ID:25266070

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations