Two-day versus seven-day course of levofloxacin in acute COPD exacerbation: a randomized controlled trial

The evidence base for the optimal antibiotic treatment duration of upper and lower respiratory tract infections: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Many trials, reviews, and meta-analyses have been performed on the comparison of short versus long antibiotic treatment in respiratory tract infections, generally supporting shorter treatment. The aim of this umbrella review is to assess the soundness of the current evidence base for optimal antibiotic treatment duration.

METHODS

A search in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Clarivate Analytics Web of Science Core Collection was performed on May 1, 2024, without date and language restrictions. Systematic reviews addressing treatment durations in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), acute sinusitis, and streptococcal pharyngitis, tonsillitis, or pharyngotonsillitis were included. Studies from inpatient and outpatient settings were included; reviews in paediatric populations were excluded. Outcomes of interest were clinical and bacteriological cure, microbiological eradication, mortality, relapse rate, and adverse events. The quality of the reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool, risk of bias of all included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (version 1), and overall quality of evidence according to GRADE.

FINDINGS

We identified 30 systematic reviews meeting the criteria; they were generally of a low to critically low quality. 21 reviews conducted a meta-analysis. For CAP outside the intensive care unit (ICU; 14 reviews, of which eight did a meta-analysis) and AECOPD (eight reviews, of which five did a meta-analysis), there was sufficient evidence supporting a treatment duration of 5 days; evidence for shorter durations is scarce. Evidence on non-ventilator-associated HAP is absent, despite identifying three reviews (of which one did a meta-analysis), since no trials were conducted exclusively in this population. For sinusitis the evidence appears to support a shorter regimen, but more evidence is needed in the population who actually require antibiotic treatment. For pharyngotonsillitis (eight reviews, of which six did a meta-analysis), sufficient evidence exists to support short-course cephalosporin but not short-course penicillin when dosed three times a day.

INTERPRETATION

The available evidence for non-ICU CAP and AECOPD supports a short-course treatment duration of 5 days in patients who have clinically improved. Efforts of the scientific community should be directed at implementing this evidence in daily practice. High-quality RCTs are needed to underpin even shorter treatment durations for CAP and AECOPD, to establish the optimal treatment duration of HAP and acute sinusitis, and to evaluate shorter duration using an optimal penicillin dosing schedule in patients with pharyngotonsillitis.

FUNDING

None.

Optimising antibiotic exposure by customising the duration of treatment for respiratory tract infections based on patient needs in primary care

Primary care antimicrobial stewardship programs have limited success in reducing antibiotic use, prompting the search for new strategies. Convincing general practitioners to resist antibiotic prescription amid uncertainty or patient demands usually poses a significant challenge. Despite common practice, standard durations for common infections lack support from clinical studies. Contrary to common belief, extending antibiotic treatment beyond the resolution of symptoms does not seem to prevent or reduce antimicrobial resistance. Shortening the duration of antibiotic therapy has shown to be effective in mitigating the spread of resistance, particularly in cases of pneumonia. Recent hospital randomised trials suggest that ending antibiotic courses by day three for most lower respiratory tract infections is effective and safe. While community studies are scarce, it is likely that these shorter, tailored courses to meet patients' needs would also be effective and safe in primary care. Therefore, primary care studies should investigate the outcomes of advising patients to discontinue antibiotic treatment upon symptom resolution. Implementing patient-centred, customised treatment durations, rather than fixed courses, is crucial for meeting individual patient needs.

Perception and views about individualising antibiotic duration for respiratory tract infections when patients feel better: a qualitative study with primary care professionals

BACKGROUND

Evidence shows a high rate of unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in primary care. There is increasing evidence showing that shorter courses for RTIs are safe and help in reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Stopping antibiotics earlier, as soon as patients feel better, rather than completing antibiotic courses, may help reduce unnecessary exposure to antibiotics and AMR.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and views of primary care healthcare professionals about customising antibiotic duration for RTIs by asking patients to stop the antibiotic course when they feel better.

DESIGN

Qualitative research.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 21 qualitative interviews with primary care professionals (experts and non-experts in AMR) were conducted from June to September 2023. Data were audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Overall, experts seemed more amenable to tailoring the antibiotic duration for RTIs when patients feel better. They also found the dogma of 'completing the course' to be obsolete, as evidence is changing and reducing the duration might lead to less AMR, but claimed that evidence that this strategy is as beneficial and safe as fixed courses was unambiguous. Non-experts, however, believed the dogma of completing the course. Clinicians expressed mixed views on what feeling better might mean, supporting a shared decision-making approach when appropriate. Participants claimed good communication to professionals and patients, but were sceptical about the risk of medicalisation when asking patients to contact clinicians again for a check-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians reported positive and negative views about individualising antibiotic courses for RTIs, but, in general, experts supported a customised antibiotic duration as soon as patients feel better. The information provided by this qualitative study will allow improving the performance of a large randomised clinical trial aimed at evaluating if this strategy is safe and beneficial.

Clinical study of NFNC in the treatment of acute exacerbation chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Most patients with acute exacerbation chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) have respiratory failure that necessitates active correction and the improvement of oxygenation is particularly important during treatment. High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy is a non-invasive respiratory aid that is widely used in the clinic that improves oxygenation state, reduces dead space ventilation and breathing effort, protects the loss of cilia in the airways, and improves patient comfort.

AIM

To compare HFNC and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in the treatment of patients with AECOPD.

METHODS

Eighty AECOPD patients were included in the study. The patients were in the intensive care department of our hospital from October 2019 to October 2021. The patients were divided into the control and treatment groups according to the different treatment methods with 40 patients in each group. Differences in patient comfort, blood gas analysis and infection indices were analyzed between the two groups.

RESULTS

After treatment, symptoms including nasal, throat and chest discomfort were significantly lower in the treatment group compared to the control group on the 3^rd and 5^th days (P < 0.05). Before treatment, the PaO₂, PaO₂/FiO₂, PaCO₂, and SaO₂ in the two groups of patients were not significantly different (P > 0.05). After treatment, the same indicators were significantly improved in both patient groups but had improved more in the treatment group compared to the control group (P < 0.05). After treatment, the white blood cell count, and the levels of C-reactive protein and calcitonin in patients in the treatment group were significantly higher compared to patients in the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

HFNC treatment can improve the ventilation of AECOPD patients whilst also improving patient comfort, and reducing complications. HFNC is a clinically valuable technique for the treatment of AECOPD.

A Prediction Model for In-Hospital Mortality of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients Based on Red Cell Distribution Width-to-Platelet Ratio

Purpose

To explore the association between red cell distribution width (RDW)-to-platelet ratio (RPR) and in-hospital mortality of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) patients and establish a prediction model based on RPR and other predictors.

Material and Methods

This cohort study included 1922 AECOPD patients aged ≥18 years in the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-III and MIMIC-IV as well as 1738 AECOPD patients from eICU Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD). Possible confounding factors were screened out by univariate logistic regression, and multivariable logistic regression was applied to evaluate the association between RPR and in-hospital mortality of AECOPD patients. The area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve and decision curve analysis (DCA) curve were plotted to evaluate the predictive value of the model. The median follow-up time was 3.14 (1.87, 6.25) day.

Results

At the end of follow-up, there were 1660 patients survived and 262 subjects died. After adjusting for confounders, we found that Log (RPR×1000) was linked with elevated risk of in-hospital mortality of AECOPD patients [odds ratio (OR)=1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.84]. The prediction model was constructed using predictors including Log (RPR×1000), age, malignant cancer, atrial fibrillation, ventilation, renal failure, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), temperature, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, white blood cell (WBC), creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), hemoglobin, infectious diseases and anion gap. The AUC of the prediction model was 0.785 (95% CI: 0.751-0.820) in the training set, 0.721 (95% CI: 0.662-0.780) in the testing set, and 0.795 (95% CI: 0.762-0.827) in the validation set.

Conclusion

RPR was associated with the in-hospital mortality of AECOPD patients. The prediction model for the in-hospital mortality of AECOPD patients based on RPR and other predictors presented good predictive performance, which might help the clinicians to quickly identify AECOPD patients at high risk of in-hospital mortality.

GOLD 2023 Executive Summary: responses from the GOLD Scientific Committee

We thank the authors of the five letters received in relation to the recent publication of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2023 Executive Summary in the European Respiratory Journal [1] for their interest and insightful comments. We address them below, albeit necessarily briefly, under three categories: a global perspective, diagnostic issues, and management of exacerbations.

The GOLD Scientific Committee respond to five letters to the Editor in relation to the GOLD 2023 Executive Summary https://bit.ly/41wJzhk

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of the antibiotic treatment courses in AECOPD

Background: No consensus exists on the antibiotic treatment course for patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Former studies indicate that shorter courses might have the same efficacy with fewer adverse events, which is inconsistent with guidelines and general practice. Existing evidence allows us to conduct a systematic review and Bayesian analysis on this topic. Methods: Four databases were searched from their inception to January 5, 2023. All statistical estimations were performed using R. "Gemtc" was the core package of analysis. CINeMA was used to assess the grade of confidence of the results. Results: Fourteen studies were included in the Bayesian meta-analysis. No difference in the clinical success rate of antibiotic treatment was observed from a super short course (1-3 days) to a long course (≥10 days). Considering the adverse events, the short course (4-6 days) might be the safest. The majority of results were of high or moderate confidence grade. Conclusion: Short course might cause the fewest adverse events. The clinical efficacy of antibiotics might not depend on the course length. Undeniably, more systematic explorations are warranted to investigate the clinical application of a shorter course of antibiotic treatment.

Can the Future of ID Escape the Inertial Dogma of Its Past? The Exemplars of Shorter Is Better and Oral Is the New IV

Like all fields of medicine, Infectious Diseases is rife with dogma that underpins much clinical practice. In this study, we discuss 2 specific examples of historical practice that have been overturned recently by numerous prospective studies: traditional durations of antimicrobial therapy and the necessity of intravenous (IV)-only therapy for specific infectious syndromes. These dogmas are based on uncontrolled case series from >50 years ago, amplified by the opinions of eminent experts. In contrast, more than 120 modern, randomized controlled trials have established that shorter durations of therapy are equally effective for many infections. Furthermore, 21 concordant randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that oral antibiotic therapy is at least as effective as IV-only therapy for osteomyelitis, bacteremia, and endocarditis. Nevertheless, practitioners in many clinical settings remain refractory to adopting these changes. It is time for Infectious Diseases to move beyond its history of eminent opinion-based medicine and truly into the era of evidenced-based medicine.