| Summary: | Objective: The aim of this article is to compare the efficacy and safety of doripenem for bacterial infections. Methods: We included six randomized clinical trials identified from PubMed and Embase up to July 31, 2014. The included trials compared efficacy and safety of doripenem for complicated intra-abdominal infections, complicated urinary tract infection, nosocomial pneumonia, and acute biliary tract infection. The meta-analysis was carried on by the statistical software of Review Manager, version 5.2. Results: Compared with empirical antimicrobial agents on overall treatment efficacy, doripenem was associated with similar clinical and microbiological treatment success rates (for the clinical evaluable population, odds ratio [OR] = 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93–1.69, p = 0.13; for clinical modified intent-to-treatment population, OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.55–1.41, p = 0.60; for microbiology evaluable population, OR = 1.16, 95% CI 0.90–1.50, p = 0.26; for microbiological modified intent-to-treatment (m-mITT), OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.81–1.20, p = 0.87). We compared incidence of adverse events and all-cause mortality to analyze treatment safety. The outcomes suggested that doripenem was similar to comparators in terms of incidence of adverse events and all-cause mortality on modified intent-to-treatment population (for incidence of AEs, OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.90–1.35, p = 0.33; for all-cause mortality, OR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.77–1.51, p = 0.67). In nosocomial pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia treatment, doripenem was not inferior to other antibacterial agents in terms of efficacy and safety. Conclusion: From this meta-analysis, we can conclude that doripenem is as valuable and well-tolerated than empirical antimicrobial agents for complicated intra-abdominal infections, complicated urinary tract infection, acute biliary tract infection and nosocomial pneumonia treatment. Keywords: Doripenem, Meta-analysis, Efficacy, Safety, Infection
|
|---|