角膜和体液中的抗菌药物浓度:荟萃分析

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Keri McLean, Grace Dawson, Daniel Foulkes, Rose Herbert, Petya Popova, Danielle Bernard-Deshong, Victoria Massie, Alfredo Borgia, Matteo Airaldi, Tobi F Somerville, Gabriela Czanner, Timothy Neal, Stephen Tuft, Stephen B Kaye
{"title":"角膜和体液中的抗菌药物浓度:荟萃分析","authors":"Keri McLean, Grace Dawson, Daniel Foulkes, Rose Herbert, Petya Popova, Danielle Bernard-Deshong, Victoria Massie, Alfredo Borgia, Matteo Airaldi, Tobi F Somerville, Gabriela Czanner, Timothy Neal, Stephen Tuft, Stephen B Kaye","doi":"10.1136/bjo-2025-327962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim To interpret the likely clinical susceptibility of isolates from microbial keratitis (MK), we performed a meta-analysis of published data that measured the concentrations of topically applied antimicrobials in the cornea or aqueous humour. We then correlated these values with the in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Methods We searched PubMed to identify studies reporting aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 53 topically applied ocular antimicrobials, spanning the following classes: beta-lactams, glycopeptides, aminoglycosides, chloramphenicol, lincosamides, macrolides, oxazolidinones, steroidal antimicrobials, tetracyclines, diaminopyrimidines, sulphonamides, lipopeptides and polymyxins. Two clinicians independently screened the abstracts and extracted data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including participant species, antimicrobial concentration, dosing regimens, epithelial status and measurement methods. Concentrations were standardised to mg/L. The data were stratified by applied concentration, dosing regime and species. First quartile concentrations (EQ1) were extrapolated to provide a conservative estimate and tabulated practice resource for clinicians treating MK. Results We screened 7247 publications. 81 publications were included in the meta-analysis, comprising data on the aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 28 antimicrobials. Bioassay was the most frequently used method for quantifying antimicrobial concentrations (25 studies), followed by liquid chromatography and fluorescence assays (18 studies each), mass spectrometry (12 studies) and radioactivity and colourimetric assays (3 studies each). Conclusion We provide a practical resource for clinicians to assess whether the expected EQ1 of an antimicrobial in the cornea is above the in vitro MIC of the pathogen. This reduces reliance on systemic break-point concentrations. This enables standardised guidelines for evidence-based antimicrobial treatment decisions for MK. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Not applicable.","PeriodicalId":9313,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antimicrobial concentrations in the cornea and aqueous humour: a meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Keri McLean, Grace Dawson, Daniel Foulkes, Rose Herbert, Petya Popova, Danielle Bernard-Deshong, Victoria Massie, Alfredo Borgia, Matteo Airaldi, Tobi F Somerville, Gabriela Czanner, Timothy Neal, Stephen Tuft, Stephen B Kaye\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bjo-2025-327962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim To interpret the likely clinical susceptibility of isolates from microbial keratitis (MK), we performed a meta-analysis of published data that measured the concentrations of topically applied antimicrobials in the cornea or aqueous humour. We then correlated these values with the in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Methods We searched PubMed to identify studies reporting aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 53 topically applied ocular antimicrobials, spanning the following classes: beta-lactams, glycopeptides, aminoglycosides, chloramphenicol, lincosamides, macrolides, oxazolidinones, steroidal antimicrobials, tetracyclines, diaminopyrimidines, sulphonamides, lipopeptides and polymyxins. Two clinicians independently screened the abstracts and extracted data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including participant species, antimicrobial concentration, dosing regimens, epithelial status and measurement methods. Concentrations were standardised to mg/L. The data were stratified by applied concentration, dosing regime and species. First quartile concentrations (EQ1) were extrapolated to provide a conservative estimate and tabulated practice resource for clinicians treating MK. Results We screened 7247 publications. 81 publications were included in the meta-analysis, comprising data on the aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 28 antimicrobials. Bioassay was the most frequently used method for quantifying antimicrobial concentrations (25 studies), followed by liquid chromatography and fluorescence assays (18 studies each), mass spectrometry (12 studies) and radioactivity and colourimetric assays (3 studies each). Conclusion We provide a practical resource for clinicians to assess whether the expected EQ1 of an antimicrobial in the cornea is above the in vitro MIC of the pathogen. This reduces reliance on systemic break-point concentrations. This enables standardised guidelines for evidence-based antimicrobial treatment decisions for MK. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Not applicable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2025-327962\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2025-327962","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了解释微生物性角膜炎(MK)分离物可能的临床敏感性,我们对已发表的数据进行了荟萃分析,这些数据测量了角膜或体液中局部应用抗菌剂的浓度。然后我们将这些值与体外最低抑制浓度(MIC)相关联。方法:我们检索PubMed以确定53种局部应用的眼部抗菌剂的水溶和/或角膜浓度的研究,涵盖以下类别:β -内酰胺类、糖肽类、氨基糖苷类、氯霉素类、lincosamides类、大环内酯类、恶唑烷类、甾体抗菌剂、四环素类、二氨基嘧啶类、磺胺类、脂肽类和多粘菌素类。两名临床医生独立筛选摘要,并从符合纳入标准的研究中提取数据,包括受试者物种、抗菌药物浓度、给药方案、上皮状态和测量方法。标准浓度为mg/L。数据按施用浓度、给药制度和物种分层。外推第一四分位数浓度(EQ1),为临床医生治疗MK提供保守估计和制表实践资源。结果我们筛选了7247篇出版物。荟萃分析纳入了81篇出版物,包括28种抗菌剂的水溶和/或角膜浓度数据。生物测定法是定量抗菌药物浓度最常用的方法(25项研究),其次是液相色谱法和荧光法(各18项研究)、质谱法(12项研究)以及放射性和比色法(各3项研究)。结论为临床医生评估抗微生物药物在角膜中的预期EQ1是否高于病原体的体外MIC提供了实用的资源。这减少了对系统断点集中的依赖。这为MK的循证抗菌药物治疗决策提供了标准化指南。与研究相关的所有数据都包含在文章中或作为补充信息上传。不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Antimicrobial concentrations in the cornea and aqueous humour: a meta-analysis
Aim To interpret the likely clinical susceptibility of isolates from microbial keratitis (MK), we performed a meta-analysis of published data that measured the concentrations of topically applied antimicrobials in the cornea or aqueous humour. We then correlated these values with the in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Methods We searched PubMed to identify studies reporting aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 53 topically applied ocular antimicrobials, spanning the following classes: beta-lactams, glycopeptides, aminoglycosides, chloramphenicol, lincosamides, macrolides, oxazolidinones, steroidal antimicrobials, tetracyclines, diaminopyrimidines, sulphonamides, lipopeptides and polymyxins. Two clinicians independently screened the abstracts and extracted data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including participant species, antimicrobial concentration, dosing regimens, epithelial status and measurement methods. Concentrations were standardised to mg/L. The data were stratified by applied concentration, dosing regime and species. First quartile concentrations (EQ1) were extrapolated to provide a conservative estimate and tabulated practice resource for clinicians treating MK. Results We screened 7247 publications. 81 publications were included in the meta-analysis, comprising data on the aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 28 antimicrobials. Bioassay was the most frequently used method for quantifying antimicrobial concentrations (25 studies), followed by liquid chromatography and fluorescence assays (18 studies each), mass spectrometry (12 studies) and radioactivity and colourimetric assays (3 studies each). Conclusion We provide a practical resource for clinicians to assess whether the expected EQ1 of an antimicrobial in the cornea is above the in vitro MIC of the pathogen. This reduces reliance on systemic break-point concentrations. This enables standardised guidelines for evidence-based antimicrobial treatment decisions for MK. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Not applicable.
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
10.30
自引率
2.40%
发文量
213
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO) is an international peer-reviewed journal for ophthalmologists and visual science specialists. BJO publishes clinical investigations, clinical observations, and clinically relevant laboratory investigations related to ophthalmology. It also provides major reviews and also publishes manuscripts covering regional issues in a global context.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信