INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has a gene that makes it resistant to methicillin, as well as to other beta-lactam antibiotics, including flucloxacillin, beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, cephalosporins, and carbapenems. MRSA can be part of the normal body flora (colonisation), especially in the nose, but it can cause infection, particularly in people with prolonged hospital admissions, with underlying disease, or after antibiotic use. About 8% of S aureus in blood cultures in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland is resistant to methicillin.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of selected treatments for MRSA infections at any body site? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS: At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 312 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 133 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 55 studies and the further review of 78 full publications. Of the 78 full articles evaluated, 15 systematic reviews and one subsequent RCT were added at this update. In addition, six studies were added to the Comment sections. We performed a GRADE evaluation for 12 PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic overview we categorised the efficacy for five interventions, based on information about the effectiveness and safety of cephalosporins (ceftobiprole, ceftaroline), daptomycin, linezolid, quinupristin-dalfopristin, pristinamycin (streptogramins), and tigecycline.
Vancomycin has been considered the standard of care for treatment of Gram-positive skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs). Its value has been questioned over the last decade owing to well acknowledged limitations in efficacy and tolerability and the emergence of newer meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-active antibacterial agents. However, no single agent has shown better results versus vancomycin in SSTI trials. The aim of this review was to identify and summarise data from meta-analyses (MAs) for the treatment of Gram-positive and MRSA SSTIs. A systematic search identified 21 published MAs examining the use of newer antibiotics and vancomycin in SSTIs. In terms of clinical and microbiological efficacy, linezolid (in Gram-positive and MRSA SSTIs) and telavancin (in MRSA SSTIs) were shown to be more effective than vancomycin. The safety of newer antimicrobials in general was comparable with vancomycin, except for telavancin, which was associated with more severe adverse events (AEs), and tigecycline owing to an all-cause mortality imbalance observed in all infections but not confirmed in SSTIs. Specific AEs were related to the use of newer agents, such as nephrotoxicity for telavancin, creatine phosphokinase elevations for daptomycin, and thrombocytopenia with linezolid. Some evidence suggests that daptomycin could be associated with reduced treatment duration, and linezolid with reduced length of intravenous treatment and hospital length of stay compared with vancomycin. Considering the limitations of this type of research and the comparative efficacy results demonstrated in head-to-head randomised controlled trials, data are still not sufficient to support the widespread use of new agents over vancomycin.
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has a gene that makes it resistant to methicillin, as well as to other beta-lactam antibiotics, including flucloxacillin, beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, cephalosporins, and carbapenems. MRSA can be part of the normal body flora (colonisation), especially in the nose, but it can cause infection, particularly in people with prolonged hospital admissions, with underlying disease, or after antibiotic use. About 8% of S aureus in blood cultures in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland is resistant to methicillin.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES:
We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of selected treatments for MRSA infections at any body site? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS:
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 312 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 133 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 55 studies and the further review of 78 full publications. Of the 78 full articles evaluated, 15 systematic reviews and one subsequent RCT were added at this update. In addition, six studies were added to the Comment sections. We performed a GRADE evaluation for 12 PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS:
In this systematic overview we categorised the efficacy for five interventions, based on information about the effectiveness and safety of cephalosporins (ceftobiprole, ceftaroline), daptomycin, linezolid, quinupristin-dalfopristin, pristinamycin (streptogramins), and tigecycline.
