Comparative efficacy and safety of inhaled antibiotics in managing chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in patients with cystic fibrosis and bronchiectasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Journal of thoracic disease Pub Date : 2025-03-31 Epub Date: 2025-03-27 DOI:10.21037/jtd-24-1525
Yifan Chen, Xiao Meng, Jiaxin Zhu, Shengxiao Lai, Zixuan Liu, Zhizhou Dou, Yaozhou Wu, Li Wei
{"title":"Comparative efficacy and safety of inhaled antibiotics in managing chronic <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> infection in patients with cystic fibrosis and bronchiectasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Yifan Chen, Xiao Meng, Jiaxin Zhu, Shengxiao Lai, Zixuan Liu, Zhizhou Dou, Yaozhou Wu, Li Wei","doi":"10.21037/jtd-24-1525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>An expanding array of inhaled antibiotic therapies can be effective for the treatment of chronic <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> (<i>P. aeruginosa</i>) infection in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) and non-CF bronchiectasis (NCFB). Nonetheless, there is a paucity of direct studies comparing the curative effects of these regimens. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of different inhaled antibiotic therapies for the relative short-term (4 weeks) and long-term (≥4 months) management of chronic <i>P. aeruginosa</i> infection in patients with CF and NCFB, respectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library database as at 25<sup>th</sup> February, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving inhaled antibiotic therapies for treatment of CF or NCFB were thoroughly screened. We conducted this NMA within a Bayesian framework. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to estimate relative effects of interventions per outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 39 RCTs were included, involving 18 inhaled antibiotic treatment regimens and 7,486 participants. The primary outcomes assessed were microbiological efficacy and tolerability. According to SUCRA results, for patients with CF, tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP) had the best profile regarding microbiological efficacy at both short-term and long-term follow-up (SUCRA, 94.5%; 90.5%). Colistin for inhalation (SUCRA, 84.0%) and tobramycin inhalation solution (TIS; SUCRA, 75.7%) had the best tolerability profile at short-term and long-term follow-up, respectively. For patients with NCFB, TIP (SUCRA, 84.2%) and gentamicin injectable solution (GM) for inhalation (SUCRA, 92.2%) had the best profile regarding microbiological efficacy at short-term and long-term follow-up, respectively. Ciprofloxacin inhalation powder had the best tolerability profile at both short-term and long-term follow-up (SUCRA, 66.4%; 85.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present study suggests that inhalation of TIS and GM are deemed exhibiting favorable profile across various outcomes for treating chronic <i>P. aeruginosa</i> infection in patients with CF and NCFB, respectively. Further large-scale and higher-quality studies are needed to support the conclusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":17542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of thoracic disease","volume":"17 3","pages":"1424-1443"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11986750/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of thoracic disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-1525","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: An expanding array of inhaled antibiotic therapies can be effective for the treatment of chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) infection in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) and non-CF bronchiectasis (NCFB). Nonetheless, there is a paucity of direct studies comparing the curative effects of these regimens. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of different inhaled antibiotic therapies for the relative short-term (4 weeks) and long-term (≥4 months) management of chronic P. aeruginosa infection in patients with CF and NCFB, respectively.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library database as at 25th February, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving inhaled antibiotic therapies for treatment of CF or NCFB were thoroughly screened. We conducted this NMA within a Bayesian framework. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to estimate relative effects of interventions per outcome.

Results: A total of 39 RCTs were included, involving 18 inhaled antibiotic treatment regimens and 7,486 participants. The primary outcomes assessed were microbiological efficacy and tolerability. According to SUCRA results, for patients with CF, tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP) had the best profile regarding microbiological efficacy at both short-term and long-term follow-up (SUCRA, 94.5%; 90.5%). Colistin for inhalation (SUCRA, 84.0%) and tobramycin inhalation solution (TIS; SUCRA, 75.7%) had the best tolerability profile at short-term and long-term follow-up, respectively. For patients with NCFB, TIP (SUCRA, 84.2%) and gentamicin injectable solution (GM) for inhalation (SUCRA, 92.2%) had the best profile regarding microbiological efficacy at short-term and long-term follow-up, respectively. Ciprofloxacin inhalation powder had the best tolerability profile at both short-term and long-term follow-up (SUCRA, 66.4%; 85.6%).

Conclusions: The present study suggests that inhalation of TIS and GM are deemed exhibiting favorable profile across various outcomes for treating chronic P. aeruginosa infection in patients with CF and NCFB, respectively. Further large-scale and higher-quality studies are needed to support the conclusion.

吸入抗生素治疗囊性纤维化和支气管扩张患者慢性铜绿假单胞菌感染的比较疗效和安全性:系统评价和网络荟萃分析
背景:在囊性纤维化(CF)和非CF支气管扩张(NCFB)患者中,越来越多的吸入抗生素治疗可有效治疗慢性铜绿假单胞菌(P. aeruginosa)感染。然而,比较这些方案的疗效的直接研究很少。本网络荟萃分析(NMA)旨在评估不同吸入抗生素治疗分别相对短期(4周)和长期(≥4个月)治疗CF和NCFB患者慢性铜绿假单胞菌感染的疗效和安全性。方法:检索截至2024年2月25日的PubMed、Web of Science、Embase和Cochrane Library数据库。涉及吸入抗生素治疗CF或NCFB的随机对照试验(RCTs)被彻底筛选。我们在贝叶斯框架内进行了这个NMA。计算累积排序曲线下的曲面(SUCRA)来估计每个结果的干预措施的相对效果。结果:共纳入39项随机对照试验,涉及18个吸入抗生素治疗方案,7486名受试者。评估的主要结果是微生物功效和耐受性。根据SUCRA结果,对于CF患者,妥布霉素吸入粉(TIP)在短期和长期随访中都具有最佳的微生物疗效(SUCRA, 94.5%;90.5%)。吸入性粘菌素(SUCRA, 84.0%)和妥布霉素吸入性溶液(TIS;SUCRA(75.7%)分别在短期和长期随访中具有最佳耐受性。对于NCFB患者,TIP (SUCRA, 84.2%)和吸入庆大霉素注射液(GM) (SUCRA, 92.2%)在短期和长期随访中分别具有最佳的微生物疗效。在短期和长期随访中,环丙沙星吸入性粉末的耐受性最好(SUCRA, 66.4%;85.6%)。结论:目前的研究表明,吸入TIS和GM分别在治疗CF和NCFB患者的慢性铜绿假单胞菌感染的各种结果中表现出有利的特征。需要进一步的大规模和高质量的研究来支持这一结论。
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
Journal of thoracic disease
Journal of thoracic disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
254
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thoracic Disease (JTD, J Thorac Dis, pISSN: 2072-1439; eISSN: 2077-6624) was founded in Dec 2009, and indexed in PubMed in Dec 2011 and Science Citation Index SCI in Feb 2013. It is published quarterly (Dec 2009- Dec 2011), bimonthly (Jan 2012 - Dec 2013), monthly (Jan. 2014-) and openly distributed worldwide. JTD received its impact factor of 2.365 for the year 2016. JTD publishes manuscripts that describe new findings and provide current, practical information on the diagnosis and treatment of conditions related to thoracic disease. All the submission and reviewing are conducted electronically so that rapid review is assured.
×
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