Gurusamy Kurinchi Selvan, Koti Rahul, Toon Clare D, Wilson Peter, Davidson Brian R
Department of Surgery, Royal Free Campus, UCL Medical School, Royal Free Hospital,, Rowland Hill Street, London, UK, NW3 2PF.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 20;2013(8):CD009726. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009726.pub2.
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection after surgery is usually rare, but incidence can be up to 33% in certain types of surgery. Postoperative MRSA infection can occur as surgical site infections (SSI), chest infections, or bloodstream infections (bacteraemia). The incidence of MRSA SSIs varies from 1% to 33% depending upon the type of surgery performed and the carrier status of the individuals concerned. The optimal antibiotic regimen for the treatment of MRSA in surgical wounds is not known.
To compare the benefits and harms of various antibiotic treatments in people with established surgical site infections (SSIs) caused by MRSA .
In February 2013 we searched the following databases: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE); NHS Economic Evaluation Database; Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL.
We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one antibiotic regimen with another antibiotic regimen for the treatment of SSIs due to MRSA. All RCTs irrespective of language, publication status, publication year, or sample size were included in the analysis.
Two review authors independently decided on inclusion and exclusion of trials, and extracted data. We planned to calculate the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for comparing the binary outcomes between the groups and mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for comparing the continuous outcomes. We planned to perform the meta-analysis using both a fixed-effect and a random-effects model. We performed intention-to-treat analysis whenever possible.
We included one trial involving 59 people hospitalised because of MRSA SSIs. Thirty participants were randomised to linezolid (600 mg either intravenously or orally every 12 hours for seven to 14 days) and 29 to vancomycin (1 g intravenously every 12 hours for seven to 14 days). The type of surgical procedures that were performed were not reported. The trial reported one outcome, which was the eradication of MRSA. The proportion of people in whom MRSA was eradicated was statistically significantly higher in the linezolid group than in the vancomycin group (RR 1.80; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.68).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence to recommend any specific antibiotic in the treatment of MRSA SSIs. Linezolid is superior to vancomycin in the eradication of MRSA SSIs on the basis of evidence from one small trial that was at high risk of bias, but the overall clinical implications of using linezolid instead of vancomycin are not known. Further well-designed randomised clinical trials are necessary in this area.
手术后耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)感染通常较为罕见,但在某些类型的手术中发病率可达33%。术后MRSA感染可表现为手术部位感染(SSI)、肺部感染或血流感染(菌血症)。MRSA手术部位感染的发病率因手术类型和相关个体的携带状态而异,范围在1%至33%之间。目前尚不清楚治疗手术伤口中MRSA的最佳抗生素方案。
比较各种抗生素治疗对已确诊由MRSA引起的手术部位感染(SSI)患者的利弊。
2013年2月,我们检索了以下数据库:Cochrane伤口组专业注册库;Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL);效果评价文摘数据库(DARE);英国国家卫生服务体系经济评价数据库;卫生技术评估(HTA)数据库;Ovid MEDLINE;Ovid MEDLINE(在研及其他未索引引文);Ovid EMBASE;以及EBSCO CINAHL。
我们仅纳入了比较一种抗生素方案与另一种抗生素方案治疗因MRSA引起的SSI的随机对照试验(RCT)。所有RCT均纳入分析,无论语言、发表状态、发表年份或样本量如何。
两位综述作者独立决定试验的纳入与排除,并提取数据。我们计划计算风险比(RR)及95%置信区间(CI)以比较组间的二元结局,计算平均差(MD)及95%CI以比较连续结局。我们计划使用固定效应模型和随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。只要可能,我们就进行意向性分析。
我们纳入了一项试验,该试验涉及59名因MRSA手术部位感染住院的患者。30名参与者被随机分配接受利奈唑胺治疗(每12小时静脉注射或口服600mg,持续7至14天),29名参与者被随机分配接受万古霉素治疗(每12小时静脉注射1g,持续7至14天)。未报告所进行的外科手术类型。该试验报告了一个结局,即MRSA的根除情况。利奈唑胺组中MRSA被根除的患者比例在统计学上显著高于万古霉素组(RR 1.80;95%CI 1.20至2.68)。
目前没有证据推荐任何特定抗生素用于治疗MRSA手术部位感染。基于一项存在高偏倚风险的小型试验的证据,利奈唑胺在根除MRSA手术部位感染方面优于万古霉素,但使用利奈唑胺而非万古霉素的总体临床意义尚不清楚。该领域需要进一步设计良好的随机临床试验。