Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Mayo Clin Proc. 2012 Apr;87(4):349-63. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2011.12.011.

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of vancomycin for the treatment of patients with gram-positive infections: focus on the study design.

Author information

  • 1Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Athens, Greece.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To study the effectiveness and safety of vancomycin compared with that of other antibiotics for the treatment of gram-positive infections.

METHODS:

Major electronic databases were searched. Data from published randomized controlled trials (January 1, 1950, to September 15, 2011) were pooled using a meta-analytic method.

RESULTS:

Fifty-three trials comparing vancomycin with linezolid, daptomycin, quinupristin-dalfopristin, tigecycline, ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, telavancin, teicoplanin, iclaprim, and dalbavancin were included in the meta-analysis. Individual antibiotics were as effective as vancomycin, except for linezolid, which was more effective than vancomycin for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.43). Comparators were as effective as vancomycin in the intent-to-treat population (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.18) but were more effective in the clinically evaluable population (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02-1.27) when all infections were pooled. When available data from all trials were pooled, no differences were noted when patients with febrile neutropenia (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82-1.39), pneumonia (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.87-1.37), bacteremia (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.76-1.45), and skin and soft tissue infections (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.39) were studied. Comparators were more effective in open-label (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.50) but not in double-blind trials (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90-1.20). Total adverse events attributed to studied antibiotics (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90-1.28) and patients withdrawn from trials (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.68-1.09) were similar in the compared groups. Mortality was not different between vancomycin and comparator antibiotics when all trials were included in the analysis (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.96-1.23). Comparators were associated with higher mortality in open-label (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.05-1.54) but not double-blind trials (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80-1.14).

CONCLUSION:

On the basis mainly of data from open-label trials, vancomycin is a treatment choice that is as effective as other available antibiotics for patients with gram-positive infections. Study design seems to make a major contribution to the outcome.

Copyright © 2012 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PMID:
22469348
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3538415
Free PMC Article

Images from this publication.See all images (4)Free text

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central Icon for PubMed Central Icon for PubMed Health
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk