Moxalactam versus clindamycin plus tobramycin in the treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections

Antibiotic therapy for pelvic inflammatory disease

BACKGROUND

Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) affects 4% to 12% of women of reproductive age. The main intervention for acute PID is broad-spectrum antibiotics administered intravenously, intramuscularly or orally. We assessed the optimal treatment regimen for PID.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic regimens to treat PID.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2020, we searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Review Group's Specialized Register, which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 1944 to 2020, located through hand and electronic searching; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; four other databases; and abstracts in selected publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing antibiotics with placebo or other antibiotics for the treatment of PID in women of reproductive age, either as inpatient or outpatient treatment. We limited our review to a comparison of drugs in current use that are recommended by the 2015 US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for treatment of PID.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and conducted GRADE assessments of the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 RCTs (6894 women) in this review, adding two new RCTs at this update. The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to high, the main limitations being serious risk of bias (due to poor reporting of study methods and lack of blinding), serious inconsistency, and serious imprecision. None of the studies reported quinolones and cephalosporins, or the outcomes laparoscopic evidence of resolution of PID based on physician opinion or fertility outcomes. Length of stay results were insufficiently reported for analysis. Regimens containing azithromycin versus regimens containing doxycycline We are uncertain whether there was a clinically relevant difference between azithromycin and doxycycline in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.55; 2 RCTs, 243 women; I² = 72%; very low-quality evidence). The analyses may result in little or no difference between azithromycin and doxycycline in rates of severe PID (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 309 women; low-quality evidence), or adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.34; 3 RCTs, 552 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). In a sensitivity analysis limited to a single study at low risk of bias, azithromycin probably improves the rates of cure in mild-moderate PID (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.67; 133 women; moderate-quality evidence), compared to doxycycline.  Regimens containing quinolone versus regimens containing cephalosporin The analysis shows there may be little or no clinically relevant difference between quinolones and cephalosporins in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.14; 4 RCTs, 772 women; I² = 15%; low-quality evidence), or severe PID (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.23; 2 RCTs, 313 women; I² = 7%; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether there was a difference between quinolones and cephalosporins in adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 2.24, 95% CI 0.52 to 9.72; 6 RCTs, 1085 women; I² =  0%; very low-quality evidence). Regimens with nitroimidazole versus regimens without nitroimidazole There was probably little or no difference between regimens with or without nitroimidazoles (metronidazole) in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09; 6 RCTs, 2660 women; I² = 50%; moderate-quality evidence), or severe PID (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01; 11 RCTs, 1383 women; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). The evidence suggests that there was little to no difference in in adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.61; 17 studies, 4021 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). . In a sensitivity analysis limited to studies at low risk of bias, there was little or no difference for rates of cure in mild-moderate PID (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 3 RCTs, 1434 women; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence). Regimens containing clindamycin plus aminoglycoside versus quinolone We are uncertain whether quinolone have little to no effect in  rates of cure for mild-moderate PID compared to clindamycin plus aminoglycoside (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.13; 1 RCT, 25 women; very low-quality evidence). The analysis may result in little or no difference between quinolone vs. clindamycin plus aminoglycoside in severe PID (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.19; 2 studies, 151 women; I² =  0%; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether quinolone reduces adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.72; 3 RCTs, 163 women; I² =  0%; very low-quality evidence). Regimens containing clindamycin plus aminoglycoside versus regimens containing cephalosporin We are uncertain whether clindamycin plus aminoglycoside improves the rates of cure for mild-moderate PID compared to cephalosporin (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09; 2 RCTs, 150 women; I² =  0%; low-quality evidence). There was probably little or no difference in rates of cure in severe PID with clindamycin plus aminoglycoside compared to cephalosporin (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.06; 10 RCTs, 959 women; I²= 21%; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether clindamycin plus aminoglycoside reduces adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment compared to cephalosporin (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.18 to 3.42; 10 RCTs, 1172 women; I² =  0%; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether one treatment was safer or more effective than any other for the cure of mild-moderate or severe PID Based on a single study at a low risk of bias, a macrolide (azithromycin) probably improves the rates of cure of mild-moderate PID, compared to tetracycline (doxycycline).

Antibiotic therapy for pelvic inflammatory disease: an abridged version of a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic regimens used to treat pelvic inflammatory disease (PID).

DESIGN

This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Risk of bias was assessed using the criteria outlined in the Cochrane guidelines. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

DATA SOURCES

Eight electronic databases were searched from date of inception up to July 2016. Database searches were complemented by screening of reference lists of relevant studies, trial registers, conference proceeding abstracts and grey literature.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

RCTs comparing the use of antibiotics with placebo or other antibiotics for the treatment of PID in women of reproductive age, either as inpatient or outpatient treatment.

RESULTS

We included 37 RCTs (6348 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to high, the main limitations being serious risk of bias (due to poor reporting of study methods and lack of blinding), serious inconsistency and serious imprecision. There was no clear evidence of a difference in the rates of cure for mild-moderate or for severe PID for the comparisons of azithromycin versus doxycycline, quinolone versus cephalosporin, nitroimidazole versus no use of nitroimidazole, clindamycin plus aminoglycoside versus quinolone, or clindamycin plus aminoglycoside versus cephalosporin. No clear evidence of a difference between regimens in antibiotic-related adverse events leading to discontinuation of therapy was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no conclusive evidence that one regimen of antibiotics was safer or more effective than any other for the treatment of PID, and there was no clear evidence for the use of nitroimidazoles (metronidazole) compared with the use of other drugs with activity against anaerobes. More evidence is needed to assess treatments for women with PID, particularly comparing regimens with or without the addition of nitroimidazoles and the efficacy of azithromycin compared with doxycycline.

Antibiotic therapy for pelvic inflammatory disease

BACKGROUND

Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is an infection that affects 4% to 12% of young women, and is one of the most common causes of morbidity in this age group. The main intervention for acute PID is the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics which cover Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and anaerobic bacteria, administered intravenously, intramuscularly, or orally. In this review, we assessed the optimal treatment regimen for PID.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic regimens used to treat pelvic inflammatory disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Review Group's Specialized Register, which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 1944 to 2016, located through electronic searching and handsearching; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid platform (1991 to July 2016); MEDLINE (1946 to July 2016); Embase (1947 to July 2016); LILACS, iAHx interface (1982 to July 2016); World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (July 2016); Web of Science (2001 to July 2016); OpenGrey (1990, 1992, 1995, 1996, and 1997); and abstracts in selected publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing the use of antibiotics with placebo or other antibiotics for the treatment of PID in women of reproductive age, either as inpatient or outpatient treatment. We limited our review to comparison of drugs in current use that are recommended for consideration by the 2015 US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for treatment of PID.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We contacted investigators to obtain missing information. We resolved disagreements by consensus or by consulting a fourth review author if necessary. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria, classifying it as high, moderate, low, or very low. We calculated Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR), using either random-effects or fixed-effect models and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome or for an additional harmful outcome, with their 95% confidence interval (CI), to measure the effect of the treatments. We conducted sensitivity analyses limited to studies at low risk of bias, for comparisons where such studies were available.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 37 RCTs (6348 women). The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to high, the main limitations being serious risk of bias (due to poor reporting of study methods and lack of blinding), serious inconsistency, and serious imprecision. Azithromycin versus doxycyclineThere was no clear evidence of a difference between the two drugs in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.55, I² = 72%, 2 RCTs, 243 women, very low-quality evidence), severe PID (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.05, 1 RCT, 309 women, low-quality evidence), or adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.34, 3 RCTs, 552 women, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence). In a sensitivity analysis limited to a single study at low risk of bias, azithromycin was superior to doxycycline in achieving cure in mild-moderate PID (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.67, 133 women, moderate-quality evidence). Quinolone versus cephalosporinThere was no clear evidence of a difference between the two drugs in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.10, 3 RCTs, 459 women, I² = 5%, low-quality evidence), severe PID (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.23, 2 RCTs, 313 women, I² = 7%, low-quality evidence), or adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 2.24, 95% CI 0.52 to 9.72, 5 RCTs, 772 women, I² = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Nitroimidazole versus no use of nitroimidazoleThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference between the nitroimidazoles (metronidazole) group and the group receiving other drugs with activity over anaerobes (e.g. amoxicillin-clavulanate) in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.10, 5 RCTs, 2427 women, I² = 60%, moderate-quality evidence), severe PID (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01, 11 RCTs, 1383 women, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence), or adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.59; participants = 3788; studies = 16; I² = 0% , low-quality evidence). In a sensitivity analysis limited to studies at low risk of bias, findings did not differ substantially from the main analysis (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.15, 2 RCTs, 1201 women, I² = 32%, high-quality evidence). Clindamycin plus aminoglycoside versus quinoloneThere was no evidence of a difference between the two groups in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.13, 1 RCT, 25 women, very low-quality evidence), severe PID (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.19, 2 studies, 151 women, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence), or adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.72, 3 RCTs, 163 women, very low-quality evidence). Clindamycin plus aminoglycoside versus cephalosporinThere was no clear evidence of a difference between the two groups in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09, 2 RCTs, 150 women, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence), severe PID (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.06, 10 RCTs, 959 women, I² = 21%, moderate-quality evidence), or adverse effects leading to discontinuation of treatment (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.18 to 3.42, 10 RCTs, 1172 women, I² = 0%, very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no conclusive evidence that one regimen of antibiotics was safer or more effective than any other for the cure of PID, and there was no clear evidence for the use of nitroimidazoles (metronidazole) compared to use of other drugs with activity over anaerobes. Moderate-quality evidence from a single study at low risk of bias suggested that a macrolide (azithromycin) may be more effective than a tetracycline (doxycycline) for curing mild-moderate PID. Our review considered only the drugs that are currently used and mentioned by the CDC.

Meta-analysis: randomized controlled trials of clindamycin/aminoglycoside vs. beta-lactam monotherapy for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections

AIM

To compare the effectiveness and safety of clindamycin/aminoglycoside with broad-spectrum beta-lactam monotherapy in patients with intra-abdominal infections by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The relevant 28 RCTS were retrieved from PubMed searches and reviewed by two reviewers independently.

RESULTS

beta-lactam monotherapy was more effective regarding cure of the infection than clindamycin/aminoglycoside (3177 clinically evaluable patients, fixed effects model, OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55-0.81). The same result was found in several subset analyses. There was no difference in all-cause mortality and attributable-to-infection mortality [2382 intention-to-treat (ITT) patients, fixed effects model, OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.74-2.11 and 1976 ITT patients, OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.59-2.41, respectively]. There was no difference regarding overall adverse events and ototoxicity (1460 ITT patients, OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.80-1.37, and 1404 ITT patients, OR = 3.22, 95% CI: 0.72-14.45, respectively). However, treatment with clindamycin/aminoglycoside was more likely to be associated with nephrotoxicity compared to beta-lactam (3065 ITT patients, OR = 3.7, 95% CI: 2.09-6.57). Clindamycin/aminoglycoside was less likely to be associated with antibiotic-associated diarrhoea compared to beta-lactam (3050 ITT patients, OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-1.00).

CONCLUSION

The results of our meta-analysis suggest that beta-lactams are more effective in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections compared with clindamycin/aminoglycoside.

Combination antimicrobial therapy in the treatment of acute pelvic inflammatory disease

We compared the clinical and microbiologic efficacy of two broad-spectrum combination antimicrobial regimens in the treatment of 148 patients with acute pelvic inflammatory disease. Patients were randomized to inpatient treatment with either cefoxitin and doxycycline (n = 75) or clindamycin and tobramycin (n = 73). These antibiotics were administered intravenously for at least 4 days, and up to 48 hours beyond defervescence. Patients were discharged on a regimen of oral doxycycline or clindamycin in accordance with the intravenous regimen to complete a total duration of therapy of 2 weeks. Neisseria gonorrhoeae (53%) and Chlamydia trachomatis (31%) were the microorganisms that were isolated most frequently from the genital tract of enrolled patients. At follow-up, N. gonorrhoeae was isolated in two patients, and C. trachomatis was isolated in none. The overall initial favorable response rate to combination antimicrobial therapy was 98.5% (130/132) in patients with uncomplicated pelvic inflammatory disease and 81% (13/16) in patients with pelvic inflammatory disease that was complicated by tuboovarian abscess. A greater than 70% decrease in abdominal tenderness score occurred in 89% of 111 patients within 6 weeks of hospital discharge. There were no significant differences between antibiotic treatment groups in any response categories or in toxicity. During the initial hospitalization, five patients (three with tuboovarian abscess; one with a pyosalpinx, and one with intractable acute and chronic pelvic inflammatory disease) required surgical intervention. These results support the recommendation to use broad-spectrum combination antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of acute pelvic inflammatory disease.

Prospective cost analysis of moxalactam versus clindamycin plus gentamicin for endomyometritis after cesarean section

The direct and indirect costs associated with either moxalactam or clindamycin plus gentamicin as treatment for endomyometritis after emergent cesarean section were compared in an open, randomized prospective trial of 114 patients. A total of 58 patients were assigned to receive moxalactam, 2 g intravenously (i.v.) every 8 h for 5 doses, followed by 2 g every 12 h and prophylactic vitamin K (10 mg) intramuscularly, and 56 patients were assigned to receive clindamycin (600 mg) i.v. every 6 h plus gentamicin (1.5 mg/kg) i.v. every 8 h. Prothrombin times were measured in moxalactam-treated patients, and patients treated with clindamycin plus gentamicin had urinalyses and blood urea nitrogen and serum creatinine determinations performed before and after treatment. Also, gentamicin levels in serum were determined as clinically indicated. A satisfactory treatment response was defined as the resolution of signs and symptoms of endomyometritis within 3 days of the start of antibiotic therapy. Satisfactory responses were demonstrated in 78% of the moxalactam-treated patients and 84% of patients treated with clindamycin plus gentamicin. Mean hospital costs for laboratory tests ($30.30 versus $4.53) and mean patient charges for laboratory tests ($76.39 versus $27.81) and medications ($539.45 versus $421.82) were significantly higher in patients treated with clindamycin plus gentamicin (P less than 0.05), while mean medication costs to the hospital were greater in the moxalactam group ($255.47 versus $195.68; P less than 0.05). However, total patient charges and total hospital drug-associated costs were not significantly different for the two group. In this tudy, moxalactam was similar in efficacy and, despite its higher acquistion cost, was comparable in total hospital costs and patient charges to clindamycin plus gentacmicin in treating endomyometritis.

Multicenter clinical trials comparing cefotetan with moxalactam or cefoxitin as therapy for obstetric and gynecologic infections

The clinical efficacy and safety of cefotetan was assessed in two multicenter clinical trials involving 335 evaluable patients hospitalized with obstetric and gynecologic infections. In Study I, cefotetan was compared with moxalactam and in Study II, cefotetan was compared with cefoxitin. The clinical response rate in Study I was 67 of 70 patients for cefotetan (96 percent) and 33 of 34 patients (97 percent) for moxalactam. In Study II, the clinical response rate was 138 of 147 patients in the cefotetan group (94 percent) and 76 of 84 patients in the cefoxitin group (91 percent). For the patients with bacteriologic response data, 196 of 205 cefotetan patients (96 percent), 23 of 24 moxalactam patients (96 percent), and 70 of 75 cefoxitin patients (93 percent) had a satisfactory bacteriologic response. Cefotetan was well tolerated and produced no major adverse reactions. The mean amount of cefotetan given was lower than that of moxalactam or cefoxitin.

A review of the role of beta-lactamase-producing bacteria in obstetric-gynecologic infections

beta-Lactam antibiotics are the most commonly used antibiotics in obstetrics and gynecology. However, they are susceptible to inactivation when attacked by beta-lactamase, an enzyme produced by many bacterial species. During the past three decades, numerous penicillins and cephalosporins have been made with a stable beta-lactam ring that resists enzyme attack. More recently enzyme inhibitors have been discovered that inactivate beta-lactamase. The combination of an enzyme inhibitor with a beta-lactam antibiotic, such as ampicillin, restores the antimicrobial activity of the beta-lactam against formerly resistant strains of staphylococci, Haemophilus influenzae, Enterobacteriaceae, and Bacteroides fragilis.

Ampicillin/sulbactam versus metronidazole-gentamicin in the treatment of soft tissue pelvic infections

The clinical efficacy and safety of ampicillin/sulbactam versus metronidazole-gentamicin were evaluated in a comparative, randomized, prospective study. Forty-four patients were enrolled: 22 received the ampicillin/sulbactam regimen, and 22 received the metronidazole-gentamicin combination. There were 33 cases of severe acute pelvic inflammatory disease, two tuboovarian abscesses, five cases of endomyometritis, and two cases of posthysterectomy pelvic cellulitis. Aerobic and anaerobic cultures from the infection sites yielded 447 microorganisms from 44 patients (an average of 10 bacteria per infection; 6.4 anaerobes and 3.7 aerobes). The most frequent isolates were Bacteroides sp., 54; Bacteroides bivius, 17; black-pigmented Bacteroides, 12; Bacteroides disiens, 11; Fusobacterium, 13; Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, 24; Peptostreptococcus asaccharolyticus, 21; anaerobic gram-positive cocci, 34; Gardnerella vaginalis, 29; Neisseria gonorrhoeae, 17; alpha-hemolytic streptococci, 15; and Escherichia coli, five. Clinical cure was noted in 19 of 20 patients treated with ampicillin/sulbactam and 18 of 21 patients treated with metronidazole-gentamicin. One treatment failure occurred in the ampicillin/sulbactam group in a patient who required antichlamydial therapy and had a complex left adnexal mass consistent with an abscess. The cases of metronidazole-gentamicin failure included two patients initially diagnosed as having tuboovarian abscesses who required a change in antibiotic therapy to control the infections. The third patient had postabortion endomyometritis that did not respond to metronidazole-gentamicin therapy within 48 hours, and required a change of medication. No adverse hematologic, renal, or hepatic effects were noted in either group of patients.

Occurrence of clindamycin-resistant anaerobic bacteria isolated from cultures taken following clindamycin therapy

MICs of clindamycin were determined by the agar dilution method against anaerobic organisms isolated from endometrial cultures in women with pelvic soft tissue infections. Cultures were obtained from 100 women both before and after clindamycin therapy, from 107 women before therapy with clindamycin or another antimicrobial agent or after treatment with an antimicrobial agent other than clindamycin, and from 9 women 1 to 9 weeks after they were discharged from the hospital following clindamycin therapy. Only 5 (0.7%) of 685 isolates tested from women who had not received clindamycin therapy were resistant to clindamycin. From the 100 cultures taken immediately after clindamycin therapy, 57 anaerobic bacteria were isolated from 28 cultures. Of the 40 anaerobic organisms for which MICs of clindamycin were determined, 25 (62.5%) were resistant to clindamycin (MIC greater than or equal to 8 micrograms/ml). The most common organisms isolated after therapy were the anaerobic gram-positive cocci (of which 32 isolates were discovered); of 28 coccal isolates tested, 64% were clindamycin resistant. Four of seven (57%) of the Bacteroides isolates tested, one unidentified gram-positive nonsporing rod, one unidentified gram-negative coccus, and one Mobiluncus sp. were also clindamycin resistant. Of 18 anaerobic isolates from the nine cultures taken 1 to 9 weeks after hospital discharge, 55% were resistant to clindamycin. The clinical significance of these findings is unknown since all patients recovered without incident and remained well. However, the data suggest that physicians need to be aware that patients with recent exposure to clindamycin may have clindamycin-resistant anaerobic organisms in a current infection. This may prevent the infection from responding to clindamycin treatment.