A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic antibiotics for diabetes-related foot infections.

Mei-Chuan Lee, Yi-Ming Hua, Han Siong Toh, Hui-Chen Su, Po-Jung Chen
{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic antibiotics for diabetes-related foot infections.","authors":"Mei-Chuan Lee, Yi-Ming Hua, Han Siong Toh, Hui-Chen Su, Po-Jung Chen","doi":"10.1177/14791641241311293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Diabetes-related foot infections (DFIs) are prevalent in patients with diabetes mellitus, often leading to severe complications, including amputations. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of systemic antibiotics in DFI treatment.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, Cochrane databases, and Embase for randomized controlled trials up to August 4, 2024, evaluating the clinical efficacy of systemic antibiotics for DFIs. Primary outcomes were clinical efficacy and safety, comparing different antibiotic classes to penicillins. Subgroup analysis was based on DFI severity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 24 studies, 16 were included in the meta-analysis. Linezolid showed a potential efficacy advantage over penicillins for DFIs but had more adverse effects. Clinical efficacy and safety were comparable across carbapenems and quinolones versus penicillins. Ertapenem showed no significant difference from piperacillin/tazobactam in treating moderate or severe DFIs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, while linezolid may offer a potential efficacy advantage over penicillins in treating DFIs, it is associated with a higher risk of drug-related adverse effects. Penicillins demonstrate comparable clinical efficacy and safety to carbapenems and fluoroquinolones for DFI management. For moderate to severe DFIs, piperacillin/tazobactam and ertapenem are viable options, though treatment should be guided by local antimicrobial resistance patterns.</p>","PeriodicalId":93978,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes & vascular disease research","volume":"22 1","pages":"14791641241311293"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11811984/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes & vascular disease research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14791641241311293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Diabetes-related foot infections (DFIs) are prevalent in patients with diabetes mellitus, often leading to severe complications, including amputations. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of systemic antibiotics in DFI treatment.

Research design and methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, Cochrane databases, and Embase for randomized controlled trials up to August 4, 2024, evaluating the clinical efficacy of systemic antibiotics for DFIs. Primary outcomes were clinical efficacy and safety, comparing different antibiotic classes to penicillins. Subgroup analysis was based on DFI severity.

Results: Of 24 studies, 16 were included in the meta-analysis. Linezolid showed a potential efficacy advantage over penicillins for DFIs but had more adverse effects. Clinical efficacy and safety were comparable across carbapenems and quinolones versus penicillins. Ertapenem showed no significant difference from piperacillin/tazobactam in treating moderate or severe DFIs.

Conclusion: In conclusion, while linezolid may offer a potential efficacy advantage over penicillins in treating DFIs, it is associated with a higher risk of drug-related adverse effects. Penicillins demonstrate comparable clinical efficacy and safety to carbapenems and fluoroquinolones for DFI management. For moderate to severe DFIs, piperacillin/tazobactam and ertapenem are viable options, though treatment should be guided by local antimicrobial resistance patterns.

系统性抗生素治疗糖尿病相关足部感染的随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:糖尿病相关性足部感染(dfi)在糖尿病患者中很普遍,经常导致严重的并发症,包括截肢。本研究旨在评估全身性抗生素治疗DFI的有效性和安全性。研究设计与方法:通过检索PubMed、Cochrane数据库和Embase数据库,系统回顾截至2024年8月4日的随机对照试验,评价全体抗生素治疗dfi的临床疗效。主要结局是临床疗效和安全性,比较不同种类的抗生素与青霉素。亚组分析基于DFI严重程度。结果:24项研究中,16项纳入meta分析。利奈唑胺对DFIs的潜在疗效优于青霉素,但副作用更多。碳青霉烯类和喹诺酮类药物与青霉素类药物的临床疗效和安全性相当。厄他培南与哌拉西林/他唑巴坦在治疗中重度dfi方面无显著差异。结论:总之,虽然利奈唑胺在治疗DFIs方面可能比青霉素具有潜在的疗效优势,但它与药物相关不良反应的风险较高有关。青霉素类药物与碳青霉烯类药物和氟喹诺酮类药物治疗DFI的临床疗效和安全性相当。对于中度至重度dfi,哌拉西林/他唑巴坦和厄他培南是可行的选择,但治疗应以当地抗菌素耐药性模式为指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信