Related Experiment Videos
Elective versus symptomatic intravenous antibiotic therapy for cystic fibrosis
1Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Eaton Road, Liverpool, Merseyside, UK, L12 2AP. breeneliz@aol.com
Background:
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the commonest micro-organism associated with respiratory infections in cystic fibrosis. Retrospective studies have suggested that survival is increased by using an aggressive policy of intravenous antipseudomonal antibiotics at regular intervals, irrespective of symptoms.
Objectives:
To determine whether there is evidence that an elective (regular) versus symptomatic intravenous antibiotic regime is associated with an improvement in clinical status and survival rates in patients with cystic fibrosis. To identify any adverse effects associated with the use of elective intravenous antibiotics, including an increase in the development of resistant organisms.
Search Strategy:
The Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetics Disorders Group Specialist Trials Register was used. This comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, hand searching relevant journals and abstracts from conference proceedings. Date of the most recent search of the Group's specialised register: October 2000.
Selection Criteria:
All randomised or pseudo-randomised controlled trials describing the use of elective compared with symptomatic intravenous antibiotic policies for any duration or dose regimen. Elective versus symptomatic intravenous antibiotic regimes against any organisms were considered. Patients with cystic fibrosis were of any age or disease severity.
Data Collection And Analysis:
Trials were independently assessed for inclusion criteria, methodological quality and data extraction by the two reviewers.
Main Results:
Three trials were identified by the initial search. Two trials reporting results from a total of 79 patients were included in the review. Differences in study design and objectives meant that data could not be pooled for meta-analysis. Neither trial demonstrated significant differences in outcome measures between intervention and comparison groups.
Reviewer'S Conclusions:
Studies are insufficient to identify conclusive evidence favouring a policy of elective intravenous antibiotic administration, despite its widespread use. Neither are the potential risks adequately evaluated. The results should be viewed with caution as patient numbers are small. Clearly there is a need for a well-designed, adequately powered, multi-centred randomised controlled trial to evaluate these issues.
Insights
Current evidence does not support elective intravenous antibiotics for cystic fibrosis patients. More research is needed to determine benefits and risks of this common treatment for Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections.
Area of Science:
- Respiratory Medicine
- Infectious Diseases
- Clinical Trials
Background:
- Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common cause of respiratory infections in cystic fibrosis (CF).
- Retrospective studies suggest improved survival with aggressive, regular intravenous antipseudomonal antibiotics.
- The efficacy and risks of this elective antibiotic policy require rigorous evaluation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess evidence for improved clinical status and survival in CF patients using elective versus symptomatic intravenous antibiotics.
- To identify adverse effects of elective antibiotics, including the development of resistant organisms.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review of randomized or pseudo-randomized controlled trials.
- Searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetics Disorders Group Specialist Trials Register up to October 2000.
- Independent assessment of trials for inclusion criteria, quality, and data extraction.
Main Results:
- Two trials with a total of 79 patients were included.
- Data could not be pooled for meta-analysis due to study design differences.
- Neither trial showed significant differences in outcomes between elective and symptomatic antibiotic groups.
Conclusions:
- Insufficient evidence supports elective intravenous antibiotic administration in CF.
- Potential risks, including antibiotic resistance, are not adequately evaluated.
- A well-designed, adequately powered, multi-centered randomized controlled trial is needed.