Intravenous fosfomycin-back to the future. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical literature.

May 7, 2017 at 2:55 pm

Clin Microbiol Infect. 2016 Dec 9. pii: S1198-743X(16)30610-3

Grabein B1, Graninger W2, Rodríguez Baño J3, Dinh A4, Liesenfeld DB5.

Author information

1 Department of Clinical Microbiology and Hospital Hygiene, Munich University Hospital, Munich, Germany.

2 Institute for Infectiology, Karl Landsteiner Society, Vienna, Austria.

3 Unidad Clínica de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Microbiología y Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Universitarios Virgen Macarena y Virgen del Rocío, Departamento de Medicina, Universidad de Sevilla-IBIS, Sevilla, Spain; Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.

4 Infectious Disease Unit, R. Poincaré University Hospital, Garches, AP-HP, Versailles Saint Quentin University, Garches, France.

5 InfectoPharm Arzneimittel und Consilium GmbH, Heppenheim, Germany. Electronic address: david.liesenfeld@infectopharm.de

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the clinical evidence and usage patterns of intravenous fosfomycin from its development to the present time.

METHODS:

PubMed, the Cochrane Library and local journals were searched for relevant studies reporting aggregated data of intravenous fosfomycin use in adults and children, with no restrictions regarding study design. Single case reports were excluded. Data were systematically abstracted for all included studies. Clinical and microbiological efficacy from randomized controlled and comparative observational studies were synthesized using meta-analysis to calculate pooled effect sizes.

RESULTS:

In all, 128 studies on intravenous fosfomycin in 5527 patients were evaluated. Fosfomycin was predominantly used for sepsis/bacteraemia, urinary tract, respiratory tract, bone and joint, and central nervous system infections. No difference in clinical (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.96-2.15) or microbiological (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.82-2.01) efficacy between fosfomycin and other antibiotics was observed in comparative trials. The pooled estimate for resistance development during fosfomycin monotherapy was 3.4% (95% CI 1.8%-5.1%). Fosfomycin showed a favourable safety profile, with generally mild adverse events not requiring discontinuation of treatment. Included studies explored intravenous fosfomycin as an anti-staphylococcal agent in monotherapy and combination therapy, whereas studies from 1990 focused on combination therapy (fosfoymcin + β-lactams or aminoglycosides) for challenging infections frequently caused by multidrug-resistant organisms.

CONCLUSION:

Intravenous fosfomycin can play a vital role in the antibiotic armamentarium, given its long history of effective and safe use. However, well-designed randomized controlled trials are still desired.

PDF

http://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(16)30610-3/pdf

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Antimicrobianos, Bacterias, Bacteriemias, Infecciones del SNC, Infecciones osteo-articulares-musculares, Infecciones respiratorias, Infecciones urinarias, Meta-Análisis, REVIEWS, Sepsis, Update.

A Case of Septic Arthritis of the Shoulder Due to Yersinia enterocolitica with Review of the Literature. Antimicrobials and QT prolongation


Calendar

May 2017
M T W T F S S
« Apr   Jun »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Most Recent Posts


%d bloggers like this: