Objective To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of linezolid versus teicoplanin in patients with MRSA pneumonia. Methods Such databases as CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, Science Direct, PubMed, Ovid, SciFinder, The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2013) and EMbase were electronically searched for published articles (randomized controlled trials or non-randomized prospective trials with comparable baseline between groups) at home and abroad on the clinical effectiveness and safety of linezolid versus teicoplanin in patients with MRSA pneumonia from January 2003 to March 2013. Using the Cochrane methods, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software in clinical cure rates, clinical effective rates, microbiologic eradication rates, and adverse reaction incidences. Results Finally, 7 studies were included involving 637 patients. The results of meta-analysis were clinical effective rates (RR=1.17, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.32, P=0.009), clinical cure rates (RR=1.06, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.19, P=0.37), bacterial clearance rates (RR=1.32, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.68, P=0.03), and adverse events rates (RR=1.24, 95%CI 0.78 to 1.97, P=0.37). The results of Begg test and Egger test were not significant (Pgt;0.05). Conclusion Current evidence shows that, in treating MRSA pneumonia, linezolid is better than teicoplanin in clinical effective rates and bacterial clearance rates. However, they are alike in clinical cure rates and bacterial clearance rates.
Objective To compare the effectiveness and safety of linezolid with vancomycin for the treatment of people with Gram-positive bacteraemia. Methods We electronically searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2009), MEDLINE, EMbase, Current Controlled Trials, The National Research Register, CBM disc and CNKI. We also handsearched some relevant journals. The search time was up to March 10, 2009. Randomized controlled trials of linezolid versus vancomycin for treatment of Gram-positive bacteraemia were included. Meta-analyses were performed for the results of homogeneous studies using the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of 8 randomized controlled trials involving 670 patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia were included. The results indicated that there was no significant difference between linezolid and vancomycin groups in treatment of Gram-positive bacteraemia [RR= 1.07, 95%CI (0.98,1.17), P= 0.15], MRSA bacteraemia [RR=1.22, 95%CI (0.97,1.53), P= 0.10] or catheter-related bacteraemia [RR= 1.01, 95%CI (0.86,1.19), P= 0.90]. There was no difference between groups in the total adverse effect (P=0.64). The rate of renal dysfunction was higher in vancomycin group (P=0.0003) and the rate of thrombopenia was higher in linezolid group (P=0.01). Conclusion Linezolid is associated with the outcomes that are not inferior to those of vancomycin in the patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia. More high-quality, large-scale randomized controlled trials exclusive for the bacteraemia are required.
ObjectiveTo explore drug resistance, resistant mechanisms and resistant phenotypes of staphylococcus aureus (SA) isolated from wound secretion to macrolides-lincosamides-streptogramins (MLS). MethodsA retrospective design was used to collect clinical data and antimicrobial resistance profiles of SA in the First Affiliated Hospital and the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University and Anxi County Hospital from June, 2008 to October, 2015. SPSS 19.0 software was used for data analysis. ResultsA total of 127 isolates were included. The distribution of four resistant phenotypes of SA to MLS were all susceptibility(S) type (n=48, 37.8%), ML type (n=41, 32.3%), M/iCR+ type (n=22, 17.3%) and MLS type (n=16, 12.6%), respectively; There were three kinds of phenotypes caused by target changing including ML type, M/iCR+ type and MLS type, respectively. Moreover, no moxicaxin, linezolid or tigecyline resistant strain was detected, while quinolons and tetracyclines showed low-level resistant. ConclusionCompared with the different samples, the resistant phenotypes of SA isolated from wound secretion to MLS are few, and the total resistance ratio is low.