利福平治疗装置相关感染:评估现代证据。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Spencer H Durham, Elizabeth W Covington, Megan Z Roberts, Elias B Chahine
{"title":"利福平治疗装置相关感染:评估现代证据。","authors":"Spencer H Durham, Elizabeth W Covington, Megan Z Roberts, Elias B Chahine","doi":"10.1093/ajhp/zxae263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Disclaimer: </strong>In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Rifampin is commonly used to treat device-related infections (DRIs) due to its activity against biofilms, despite a history of limited clinical evidence to support its use. Evidence published since 2011 regarding rifampin use for DRIs is reviewed to describe the contemporary findings and ongoing considerations for rifampin use in these infections.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>A literature review was performed by searching PubMed and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies evaluating systemic rifampin use for the treatment of DRIs published from 2011 to 2023. References of identified studies were also screened for additional pertinent studies. Sixty-eight studies were identified, and 48 met the inclusion criteria. Rifampin efficacy was evaluated as both a primary outcome for cardiac device infections (n = 3) and prosthetic joint infections (n = 21) and as a nonprimary outcome (n = 24). Overall, the studies were primarily retrospective (n = 36) and small, with sample sizes ranging from 14 to 842 patients, and varied greatly with respect to prosthesis site, surgical intervention, pathogen, infection time frame, and antibiotic combination and duration. Efficacy outcome results varied greatly, with statistically significant evidence for the efficacy of rifampin combination in DRIs limited to a single study of prosthetic vascular graft infections and 13 studies of prosthetic joint infections.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The modern literature provides conflicting results regarding the benefit and lack of benefit with rifampin combination therapy in DRIs. Additional, robust research is imperative to solidify the ongoing role of rifampin in DRIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":7577,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rifampin in device-related infections: Assessing the modern evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Spencer H Durham, Elizabeth W Covington, Megan Z Roberts, Elias B Chahine\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ajhp/zxae263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Disclaimer: </strong>In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Rifampin is commonly used to treat device-related infections (DRIs) due to its activity against biofilms, despite a history of limited clinical evidence to support its use. Evidence published since 2011 regarding rifampin use for DRIs is reviewed to describe the contemporary findings and ongoing considerations for rifampin use in these infections.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>A literature review was performed by searching PubMed and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies evaluating systemic rifampin use for the treatment of DRIs published from 2011 to 2023. References of identified studies were also screened for additional pertinent studies. Sixty-eight studies were identified, and 48 met the inclusion criteria. Rifampin efficacy was evaluated as both a primary outcome for cardiac device infections (n = 3) and prosthetic joint infections (n = 21) and as a nonprimary outcome (n = 24). Overall, the studies were primarily retrospective (n = 36) and small, with sample sizes ranging from 14 to 842 patients, and varied greatly with respect to prosthesis site, surgical intervention, pathogen, infection time frame, and antibiotic combination and duration. Efficacy outcome results varied greatly, with statistically significant evidence for the efficacy of rifampin combination in DRIs limited to a single study of prosthetic vascular graft infections and 13 studies of prosthetic joint infections.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The modern literature provides conflicting results regarding the benefit and lack of benefit with rifampin combination therapy in DRIs. Additional, robust research is imperative to solidify the ongoing role of rifampin in DRIs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxae263\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxae263","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

免责声明:为了加快文章的发表,AJHP在接受稿件后会尽快将其发布到网上。被录用的稿件已经过同行评审和校对,但在进行技术格式化和作者校对之前会在网上发布。这些稿件不是最终记录版本,稍后将由最终文章(按AJHP风格格式化并由作者校对)取代:目的:利福平具有抗生物膜的活性,因此常用于治疗器械相关感染(DRI),尽管支持其使用的临床证据有限。本文对 2011 年以来发表的有关利福平用于 DRIs 的证据进行了回顾,以描述利福平用于这些感染的最新发现和持续考虑因素。摘要:通过搜索 PubMed 和谷歌学术进行了文献综述,以确定 2011 年至 2023 年发表的评估系统性利福平用于治疗 DRIs 的相关研究。此外,还筛选了已确定研究的参考文献,以了解其他相关研究。共确定了 68 项研究,其中 48 项符合纳入标准。利福平疗效既作为心脏装置感染(3 例)和人工关节感染(21 例)的主要结果进行评估,也作为非主要结果(24 例)进行评估。总体而言,这些研究主要是回顾性的(n = 36),且规模较小,样本量从 14 到 842 例患者不等,在假体部位、手术干预、病原体、感染时限以及抗生素组合和持续时间方面差异很大。疗效结果差异很大,利福平联合用药对 DRIs 的疗效具有统计学意义的证据仅限于一项关于假体血管移植感染的研究和 13 项关于假体关节感染的研究:结论:现代文献对利福平联合疗法在 DRIs 中的获益与否提供了相互矛盾的结果。为了巩固利福平在 DRIs 中的作用,必须开展更多有力的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rifampin in device-related infections: Assessing the modern evidence.

Disclaimer: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Purpose: Rifampin is commonly used to treat device-related infections (DRIs) due to its activity against biofilms, despite a history of limited clinical evidence to support its use. Evidence published since 2011 regarding rifampin use for DRIs is reviewed to describe the contemporary findings and ongoing considerations for rifampin use in these infections.

Summary: A literature review was performed by searching PubMed and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies evaluating systemic rifampin use for the treatment of DRIs published from 2011 to 2023. References of identified studies were also screened for additional pertinent studies. Sixty-eight studies were identified, and 48 met the inclusion criteria. Rifampin efficacy was evaluated as both a primary outcome for cardiac device infections (n = 3) and prosthetic joint infections (n = 21) and as a nonprimary outcome (n = 24). Overall, the studies were primarily retrospective (n = 36) and small, with sample sizes ranging from 14 to 842 patients, and varied greatly with respect to prosthesis site, surgical intervention, pathogen, infection time frame, and antibiotic combination and duration. Efficacy outcome results varied greatly, with statistically significant evidence for the efficacy of rifampin combination in DRIs limited to a single study of prosthetic vascular graft infections and 13 studies of prosthetic joint infections.

Conclusion: The modern literature provides conflicting results regarding the benefit and lack of benefit with rifampin combination therapy in DRIs. Additional, robust research is imperative to solidify the ongoing role of rifampin in DRIs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
18.50%
发文量
341
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy (AJHP) is the official publication of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP). It publishes peer-reviewed scientific papers on contemporary drug therapy and pharmacy practice innovations in hospitals and health systems. With a circulation of more than 43,000, AJHP is the most widely recognized and respected clinical pharmacy journal in the world.
×
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