Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Infection 4/2022

20.05.2022 | Review

The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Krishan Yadav, Natalia Krzyzaniak, Charlotte Alexander, Anna Mae Scott, Justin Clark, Paul Glasziou, Gerben Keijzers

Erschienen in: Infection | Ausgabe 4/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis is highly variable with respect to agent, dose, and route of administration. As there is uncertainty about optimal/appropriate time to reassess, we aimed to assess time to clinical response.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials reporting clinical response of uncomplicated cellulitis to antibiotic treatment over multiple timepoints. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to June 2021 without language restrictions. The primary outcome was time to clinical response. Other outcomes were components of clinical response (pain, severity score, redness, edema measured at ≥ 2 timepoints) and the proportion of patients with treatment failure. We performed a pooled estimate of the average time to clinical response together with 95% confidence intervals using a random effects model.

Results

We included 32 randomized controlled trials (n = 13,576 participants). The mean time to clinical response was 1.68 days (95%CI 1.48–1.88; I2 = 76%). The response to treatment for specific components was as follows: ~ 50% reduction of pain and severity score by day 5, a ~ 33% reduction in area of redness by day 2–3, and a 30–50% reduction of proportion of patients with edema by day 2–4. Treatment failure was variably defined with an overall failure rate of 12% (95%CI 9–16%).

Conclusion

The best available data suggest the optimal time to clinical reassessment is between 2 and 4 days, but this must be interpreted with caution due to considerable heterogeneity and small number of included studies.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Pallin DJ, Egan DJ, Pelletier AJ, et al. Increased US emergency department visits for skin and soft tissue infections, and changes in antibiotic choices, during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51:291–8.PubMedCrossRef Pallin DJ, Egan DJ, Pelletier AJ, et al. Increased US emergency department visits for skin and soft tissue infections, and changes in antibiotic choices, during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51:291–8.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Stenstrom R, Grafstein E, Romney M, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infection in a Canadian emergency department. CJEM. 2009;11:430–8.PubMedCrossRef Stenstrom R, Grafstein E, Romney M, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infection in a Canadian emergency department. CJEM. 2009;11:430–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Aboltins CA, Hutchinson AF, Sinnappu RN, et al. Oral versus parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of cellulitis: a randomized non-inferiority trial. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:581–6.PubMedCrossRef Aboltins CA, Hutchinson AF, Sinnappu RN, et al. Oral versus parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of cellulitis: a randomized non-inferiority trial. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:581–6.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Bernard P, Chosidow O, Vaillant L. Oral pristinamycin versus standard penicillin regimen to treat erysipelas in adults: randomised, non-inferiority, open trial. BMJ. 2002;325:864.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Bernard P, Chosidow O, Vaillant L. Oral pristinamycin versus standard penicillin regimen to treat erysipelas in adults: randomised, non-inferiority, open trial. BMJ. 2002;325:864.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:e10-52.PubMedCrossRef Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:e10-52.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Yadav K, Gatien M, Corrales-Medina V, et al. Antimicrobial treatment decision for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections in the emergency department. CJEM. 2017;19:175–80.PubMedCrossRef Yadav K, Gatien M, Corrales-Medina V, et al. Antimicrobial treatment decision for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections in the emergency department. CJEM. 2017;19:175–80.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Hamill LM, Thi YE, Keijzers G. Picking the low-hanging fruit: why not choose oral antibiotics for skin and soft-tissue infections in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2019;31:1119–22.PubMedCrossRef Hamill LM, Thi YE, Keijzers G. Picking the low-hanging fruit: why not choose oral antibiotics for skin and soft-tissue infections in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2019;31:1119–22.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Yadav K, Nath A, Suh KN, et al. Treatment failure definitions for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review. Infection. 2020;48:75–83.PubMedCrossRef Yadav K, Nath A, Suh KN, et al. Treatment failure definitions for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review. Infection. 2020;48:75–83.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Moran GJ, Krishnadasan A, Mower WR, et al. Effect of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole vs cephalexin alone on clinical cure of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:2088–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Moran GJ, Krishnadasan A, Mower WR, et al. Effect of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole vs cephalexin alone on clinical cure of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:2088–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Cross ELA, Jordan H, Godfrey R, et al. Route and duration of antibiotic therapy in acute cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and harms of antibiotic treatment. J Infect. 2020;81:521–31.PubMedCrossRef Cross ELA, Jordan H, Godfrey R, et al. Route and duration of antibiotic therapy in acute cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and harms of antibiotic treatment. J Infect. 2020;81:521–31.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Thomas KS, Brindle R, Chalmers JR, et al. Identifying priority areas for research into the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cellulitis (erysipelas): results of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:541–3.PubMedCrossRef Thomas KS, Brindle R, Chalmers JR, et al. Identifying priority areas for research into the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cellulitis (erysipelas): results of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:541–3.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339: b2535.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339: b2535.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Clark JM, Sanders S, Carter M, et al. Improving the translation of search strategies using the Polyglot Search Translator: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020;108:195–207.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Clark JM, Sanders S, Carter M, et al. Improving the translation of search strategies using the Polyglot Search Translator: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020;108:195–207.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Marshall IJ, Noel-Storr A, Kuiper J, et al. Machine learning for identifying Randomized Controlled Trials: an evaluation and practitioner’s guide. Res Synth Methods. 2018;9:602–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Marshall IJ, Noel-Storr A, Kuiper J, et al. Machine learning for identifying Randomized Controlled Trials: an evaluation and practitioner’s guide. Res Synth Methods. 2018;9:602–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic review of interventions. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2019.CrossRef Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic review of interventions. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2019.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Bucko AD, Hunt BJ, Kidd SL, et al. Randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of oral cefditoren 200 or 400 mg BID with either cefuroxime 250 mg BID or cefadroxil 500 mg BID for the treatment of uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections. Clin Ther. 2002;24:1134–47.PubMedCrossRef Bucko AD, Hunt BJ, Kidd SL, et al. Randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of oral cefditoren 200 or 400 mg BID with either cefuroxime 250 mg BID or cefadroxil 500 mg BID for the treatment of uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections. Clin Ther. 2002;24:1134–47.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Hepburn MJ, Dooley DP, Skidmore PJ, et al. Comparison of short-course (5 days) and standard (10 days) treatment for uncomplicated cellulitis. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1669–74.PubMedCrossRef Hepburn MJ, Dooley DP, Skidmore PJ, et al. Comparison of short-course (5 days) and standard (10 days) treatment for uncomplicated cellulitis. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1669–74.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Huang DB, O’Riordan W, Overcash JS, et al. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous iclaprim vs vancomycin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens: REVIVE-1. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66:1222–9.PubMedCrossRef Huang DB, O’Riordan W, Overcash JS, et al. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous iclaprim vs vancomycin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens: REVIVE-1. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66:1222–9.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Kingsley J, Mehra P, Lawrence LE, et al. A randomized, double-blind, Phase 2 study to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections treated with delafloxacin, linezolid or vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71:821–9.PubMedCrossRef Kingsley J, Mehra P, Lawrence LE, et al. A randomized, double-blind, Phase 2 study to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections treated with delafloxacin, linezolid or vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71:821–9.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Lipsky BA, Yarbrough DR 3rd, Walker FBT, et al. Ofloxacin versus cephalexin for treating skin and soft tissue infections. Int J Dermatol. 1992;31:443–5.PubMedCrossRef Lipsky BA, Yarbrough DR 3rd, Walker FBT, et al. Ofloxacin versus cephalexin for treating skin and soft tissue infections. Int J Dermatol. 1992;31:443–5.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Lodise TP, Redell M, Armstrong SO, et al. Efficacy and safety of oritavancin relative to vancomycin for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) in the outpatient setting: results from the SOLO clinical trials. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4:ofw274.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Lodise TP, Redell M, Armstrong SO, et al. Efficacy and safety of oritavancin relative to vancomycin for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) in the outpatient setting: results from the SOLO clinical trials. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4:ofw274.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Riordan W, Cardenas C, Shin E, et al. Once-daily oral omadacycline versus twice-daily oral linezolid for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (OASIS-2): a phase 3, double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:1080–90.PubMedCrossRef O’Riordan W, Cardenas C, Shin E, et al. Once-daily oral omadacycline versus twice-daily oral linezolid for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (OASIS-2): a phase 3, double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:1080–90.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Pallin DJ, Binder WD, Allen MB, et al. Clinical trial: comparative effectiveness of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus cephalexin alone for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1754–62.PubMedCrossRef Pallin DJ, Binder WD, Allen MB, et al. Clinical trial: comparative effectiveness of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus cephalexin alone for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1754–62.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Pullman J, Gardovskis J, Farley B, et al. Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:3471–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Pullman J, Gardovskis J, Farley B, et al. Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:3471–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Tack KJ, Littlejohn TW, Mailloux G, et al. Cefdinir versus cephalexin for the treatment of skin and skin-structure infections. The Cefdinir Adult Skin Infection Study Group. Clin Ther. 1998;20:244–56.PubMedCrossRef Tack KJ, Littlejohn TW, Mailloux G, et al. Cefdinir versus cephalexin for the treatment of skin and skin-structure infections. The Cefdinir Adult Skin Infection Study Group. Clin Ther. 1998;20:244–56.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Tarshis GA, Miskin BM, Jones TM, et al. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:2358–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Tarshis GA, Miskin BM, Jones TM, et al. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:2358–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Clarke MC, Cheng AC, Pollard JG, et al. Lessons learned from a randomized controlled trial of short-course intravenous antibiotic therapy for erysipelas and cellulitis of the lower limb (switch trial). Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019;6:ofz335.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Clarke MC, Cheng AC, Pollard JG, et al. Lessons learned from a randomized controlled trial of short-course intravenous antibiotic therapy for erysipelas and cellulitis of the lower limb (switch trial). Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019;6:ofz335.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Davis JS, Mackrow C, Binks P, et al. A double-blind randomized controlled trial of ibuprofen compared to placebo for uncomplicated cellulitis of the upper or lower limb. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017;23:242–6.PubMedCrossRef Davis JS, Mackrow C, Binks P, et al. A double-blind randomized controlled trial of ibuprofen compared to placebo for uncomplicated cellulitis of the upper or lower limb. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017;23:242–6.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Ibrahim LF, Hopper SM, Orsini F, et al. Efficacy and safety of intravenous ceftriaxone at home versus intravenous flucloxacillin in hospital for children with cellulitis (CHOICE): a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:477–86.PubMedCrossRef Ibrahim LF, Hopper SM, Orsini F, et al. Efficacy and safety of intravenous ceftriaxone at home versus intravenous flucloxacillin in hospital for children with cellulitis (CHOICE): a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:477–86.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Leman P, Mukherjee D. Flucloxacillin alone or combined with benzylpenicillin to treat lower limb cellulitis: a randomised controlled trial. Emerg Med J. 2005;22:342–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Leman P, Mukherjee D. Flucloxacillin alone or combined with benzylpenicillin to treat lower limb cellulitis: a randomised controlled trial. Emerg Med J. 2005;22:342–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Bernard P, Plantin P, Roger H, et al. Roxithromycin versus penicillin in the treatment of erysipelas in adults: a comparative study. Br J Dermatol. 1992;127:155–9.PubMedCrossRef Bernard P, Plantin P, Roger H, et al. Roxithromycin versus penicillin in the treatment of erysipelas in adults: a comparative study. Br J Dermatol. 1992;127:155–9.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Cranendonk DR, Opmeer BC, van Agtmael MA, et al. Antibiotic treatment for 6 days versus 12 days in patients with severe cellulitis: a multicentre randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:606–12.PubMedCrossRef Cranendonk DR, Opmeer BC, van Agtmael MA, et al. Antibiotic treatment for 6 days versus 12 days in patients with severe cellulitis: a multicentre randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:606–12.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Corwin P, Toop L, McGeoch G, et al. Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital. BMJ. 2005;330:129.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Corwin P, Toop L, McGeoch G, et al. Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital. BMJ. 2005;330:129.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Bergkvist PI, Sjöbeck K. Antibiotic and prednisolone therapy of erysipelas: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Scand J Infect Dis. 1997;29:377–82.PubMedCrossRef Bergkvist PI, Sjöbeck K. Antibiotic and prednisolone therapy of erysipelas: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Scand J Infect Dis. 1997;29:377–82.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Brindle R, Williams OM, Davies P, et al. Adjunctive clindamycin for cellulitis: a clinical trial comparing flucloxacillin with or without clindamycin for the treatment of limb cellulitis. BMJ Open. 2017;7: e013260.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Brindle R, Williams OM, Davies P, et al. Adjunctive clindamycin for cellulitis: a clinical trial comparing flucloxacillin with or without clindamycin for the treatment of limb cellulitis. BMJ Open. 2017;7: e013260.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Boucher HW, Wilcox M, Talbot GH, et al. Once-weekly dalbavancin versus daily conventional therapy for skin infection. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2169–79.PubMedCrossRef Boucher HW, Wilcox M, Talbot GH, et al. Once-weekly dalbavancin versus daily conventional therapy for skin infection. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2169–79.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Montero L. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of azithromycin and cefaclor in the treatment of children with acute skin and/or soft tissue infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;37:125–31.PubMedCrossRef Montero L. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of azithromycin and cefaclor in the treatment of children with acute skin and/or soft tissue infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;37:125–31.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Moran GJ, Fang E, Corey GR, et al. Tedizolid for 6 days versus linezolid for 10 days for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ESTABLISH-2): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14:696–705.PubMedCrossRef Moran GJ, Fang E, Corey GR, et al. Tedizolid for 6 days versus linezolid for 10 days for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ESTABLISH-2): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14:696–705.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Riordan W, Green S, Overcash JS, et al. Omadacycline for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:528–38.PubMedCrossRef O’Riordan W, Green S, Overcash JS, et al. Omadacycline for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:528–38.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Pertel PE, Eisenstein BI, Link AS, et al. The efficacy and safety of daptomycin vs vancomycin for the treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63:368–75.PubMedCrossRef Pertel PE, Eisenstein BI, Link AS, et al. The efficacy and safety of daptomycin vs vancomycin for the treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63:368–75.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, et al. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;309:559–69.PubMedCrossRef Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, et al. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;309:559–69.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Rodriguez-Solares A, Pérez-Gutiérrez F, Prosperi J, et al. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerance of azithromycin, dicloxacillin and flucloxacillin in the treatment of children with acute skin and skin-structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993;31:103–9.PubMedCrossRef Rodriguez-Solares A, Pérez-Gutiérrez F, Prosperi J, et al. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerance of azithromycin, dicloxacillin and flucloxacillin in the treatment of children with acute skin and skin-structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993;31:103–9.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Brindle R, Williams OM, Barton E, et al. Assessment of antibiotic treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:1033–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Brindle R, Williams OM, Barton E, et al. Assessment of antibiotic treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:1033–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Bruun T, Oppegaard O, Hufthammer KO, et al. Early response in cellulitis: a prospective study of dynamics and predictors. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63:1034–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Bruun T, Oppegaard O, Hufthammer KO, et al. Early response in cellulitis: a prospective study of dynamics and predictors. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63:1034–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Zurück zum Zitat Talbot GH, Powers JH, Fleming TR, et al. Progress on developing endpoints for registrational clinical trials of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: update from the Biomarkers Consortium of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55:1114–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Talbot GH, Powers JH, Fleming TR, et al. Progress on developing endpoints for registrational clinical trials of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: update from the Biomarkers Consortium of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55:1114–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von
Krishan Yadav
Natalia Krzyzaniak
Charlotte Alexander
Anna Mae Scott
Justin Clark
Paul Glasziou
Gerben Keijzers
Publikationsdatum
20.05.2022
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Infection / Ausgabe 4/2022
Print ISSN: 0300-8126
Elektronische ISSN: 1439-0973
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-022-01842-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2022

Infection 4/2022 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

24.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

In der MONARCHE-3-Studie lebten Frauen mit fortgeschrittenem Hormonrezeptor-positivem, HER2-negativem Brustkrebs länger, wenn sie zusätzlich zu einem nicht steroidalen Aromatasehemmer mit Abemaciclib behandelt wurden; allerdings verfehlte der numerische Zugewinn die statistische Signifikanz.

ADT zur Radiatio nach Prostatektomie: Wenn, dann wohl länger

24.05.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Welchen Nutzen es trägt, wenn die Strahlentherapie nach radikaler Prostatektomie um eine Androgendeprivation ergänzt wird, hat die RADICALS-HD-Studie untersucht. Nun liegen die Ergebnisse vor. Sie sprechen für länger dauernden Hormonentzug.

„Überwältigende“ Evidenz für Tripeltherapie beim metastasierten Prostata-Ca.

22.05.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Patienten mit metastasiertem hormonsensitivem Prostatakarzinom sollten nicht mehr mit einer alleinigen Androgendeprivationstherapie (ADT) behandelt werden, mahnt ein US-Team nach Sichtung der aktuellen Datenlage. Mit einer Tripeltherapie haben die Betroffenen offenbar die besten Überlebenschancen.

So sicher sind Tattoos: Neue Daten zur Risikobewertung

22.05.2024 Melanom Nachrichten

Das größte medizinische Problem bei Tattoos bleiben allergische Reaktionen. Melanome werden dadurch offensichtlich nicht gefördert, die Farbpigmente könnten aber andere Tumoren begünstigen.

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.