Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

A comparison of different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of infective endocarditis.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Additional Information
    • Publication Information:
      Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
    • Publication Date:
      2020
    • Collection:
      Universidad Francisco de Vitoria: Depósito Digital FV (DDFV)
    • Abstract:
      Infective endocarditis is a microbial infection of the endocardial surface of the heart. Antibiotics are the cornerstone of treatment, but due to the differences in presentation, populations affected, and the wide variety of micro-organisms that can be responsible, their use is not standardised. This is an update of a review previously published in 2016. Objectives: To assess the existing evidence about the clinical benefits and harms of different antibiotics regimens used to treat people with infective endocarditis. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase Classic and Embase, LILACS, CINAHL, and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on 6 January 2020. We also searched three trials registers and handsearched the reference lists of included papers. We applied no language restrictions. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of antibiotic regimens for treating definitive infective endocarditis diagnosed according to modified Duke's criteria. We considered all-cause mortality, cure rates, and adverse events as the primary outcomes. We excluded people with possible infective endocarditis and pregnant women. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction in duplicate. We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables and used GRADE methodology to assess the quality of the evidence. We described the included studies narratively. Main results: Six small RCTs involving 1143 allocated/632 analysed participants met the inclusion criteria of this first update. The included trials had a high risk of bias. Three trials were sponsored by drug companies. Due to heterogeneity in outcome definitions and different antibiotics used data could not be pooled. The included trials compared miscellaneous antibiotic schedules having uncertain effects for all of the prespecified outcomes in this review. Evidence was either low ...
    • ISSN:
      1469-493X
    • Relation:
      http://hdl.handle.net/10641/2317
    • Accession Number:
      10.1002/14651858.CD009880.pub3
    • Online Access:
      http://hdl.handle.net/10641/2317
      https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009880.pub3
    • Rights:
      Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España ; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/ ; openAccess
    • Accession Number:
      edsbas.B8662644