ObjectiveThe main aim of this network meta-analysis is to identify the empiric antibiotic (Em-ATB) with the highest probability of being the best (HPBB) in terms of (1) cure rate and (2) mortality rate in hospitalised patients with community acquired pneumonia (CAP) .MethodInclusion criteria: (1) adult patients (>16 years old) diagnosed with CAP that required hospitalisation; (2) randomised to at least two different Em-ATBs, (3) that report cure rate and (4) are written in English or Spanish. Exclusion criteria: (1) ambiguous antibiotics protocol and (2) published exclusively in abstract or letter format. Data sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and citation reviews from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2018. Risk of bias: Cochrane’s tool. Quality of the systematic review (SR): A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2. Certainity of the evidence: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Statistical analyses: frequentist method performed with the ‘netmeta’ library, R package.Results27 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the initial 41 307 screened citations were included. Regarding the risk of bias, more than one quarter of the studies presented low risk and no study presented high risk in all domains. The SR quality is moderate. For cure, two networks were constructed. Thus, two Em-ATBs have the HPBB: cetaroline 600 mg (two times a day) and piperacillin 2000 mg (two times a day). For mortality, three networks were constructed. Thus, three Em-ATBs have the HPBB: ceftriaxone 2000 mg (once a day) plus levofloxacin 500 (two times a day), ertapenem 1000 mg (two times a day) and amikacin 250 mg (two times a day) plus clarithromycin 500 mg (two times a day). The certainity of evidence for each results is moderate.ConclusionFor cure rate, ceftaroline and piperaciline are the options with the HPBB. However, for mortality rate, the options are ceftriaxone plus levofloxacin, ertapenem and amikacin plus clarithromycin. It seems necessary to conduct an RCT that compares treatments with the HPBB for each event (cure or mortality) (CRD42017060692).

No abstract

Introduction. The aims of the study were: to develop a predictive model for hospital mortality and another for hospital re-admission, to identify the impact of antibiotic delay in the mortality rate and, to report the rate of inappropriate antibiotic therapy. Material and methods. A cohort and retrospective study was conducted at the HM Sanchinarro University Hospital during the period September 1st, 2012 to March 31th, 2013. The inclusion criteria were: age> 18 years, hospital admission from the ED with a diagnosis of bacterial infection. The exclusion criteria were: suspected viral infection, negative bacteriological cultures, life expectancy less than 6 months, lack of clinical information, assistance exclusively by the trauma emergency department. Two logistic models were made (hospital mortality and hospital re-admission). Results. A total of 517 patients were included. The final mortality model (30 deaths) include the following variables: respiratory rate (OR 1.12; IC95% 1.02; 1.22), oxygen saturation (OR 0.92; IC95% 0.87; 0.98), creatinine (OR 2.33; IC95% 1.62; 3.36), COPD (OR 3.02; IC95% 1.06; 8.21), cancer (OR 3.34; IC95% 1.07; 9.98) and chemotherapy in the last 3 months (OR 4.83; IC95% 1.54; 16.41). The final model for hospital re-admission (28 re-admissions) include the following variables: hepatopathy (OR 5.51; IC95% 1.57; 16.88), GPT (OR 1.005; IC95% 1.003; 1.008), history of stroke (OR 5.06; IC95% 1.04; 18.80) and arterial hypertension (OR 3.15; IC95% 1.38; 7.56). The antibiotic therapy delays not influenced the mortality or re-admission rate. In 24.3% the causative microorganism was identified and antibiotic treatment was inappropriate 19.6%. Conclusion. Hospital mortality rate was 5.8% and readmission rate was 5.7%. Variables associated with mortality differ from those associated with re-admission. The delay in the antibiotic initiation was not associated with a deleterious effect. Antibiotic therapy was inadequate in almost 20% of patients.

No abstract