Treatment of sinus empyema in adults. A coordinated Nordic multicenter trial of cefixime vs. cefaclor

The prevalence of bacterial infection in acute rhinosinusitis: a Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To systematically assess the prevalence of bacterial infection in adults with acute rhinosinusitis (ARS).

METHODS

Electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant studies published up to June 2012.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine articles, evaluating a total of 9,595 patients with a clinical diagnosis of ARS, were included in the study. Of these, 14 (48%) studies required radiographic confirmation of sinusitis, one study (3%) required evidence of purulence, 10 studies (35%) required both for inclusion in the study population, and four studies (14%) required neither. The random effects model estimate of prevalence of bacterial growth on all cultures was 53.7% (CI 48.4%-59.0%), ranging from 52.5% (CI 46.7%-58.3%) in studies requiring radiographic confirmation of sinusitis to 61.1% (CI 54.0%-68.1%) in studies requiring neither radiographic evidence nor purulence on exam. Studies that obtained cultures from antral swab had a prevalence of bacterial growth of 61.0% (CI 54.7%-67.2%), whereas those utilizing endoscopic meatal sampling had a prevalence of 32.9% (CI 19.0%-46.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies evaluate the recovery of bacteria via culture in adults with a diagnosis of ABRS or ARS based on clinical criteria alone. With radiographic and/or endoscopic confirmation, antral puncture and endoscopically guided cultures produce positive bacterial cultures in approximately one-half of patients. Opportunities exist to improve diagnostic accuracy for bacterial infection in ARS.

Staphylococcus aureus is a major pathogen in acute bacterial rhinosinusitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis is a common health problem in the United States. Appropriate recommendations for the treatment of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis are based on the prevalence and expected antimicrobial susceptibilities of specific pathogens.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed on the English language literature from the period 1990-2006, including prospective studies of antibiotic therapy for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis for which sinus cultures were required in the form of either maxillary sinus taps or middle meatal cultures. Weighted mean culture rates for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, and Staphylococcus aureus were abstracted from the included articles and compared according to culture technique.

RESULTS

Culture rates (i.e., the percentage of patients with positive culture results) were 32.7% for S. pneumoniae, 31.6% for H. influenzae, 10.1% for S. aureus, and 8.8% for M. catarrhalis. No statistically significant difference was seen between the culture rates for S. aureus and M. catarrhalis. Analysis of the effect of culture technique on the culture rates revealed no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of S. aureus among sinus cultures warrants its reconsideration as a major pathogen in acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. As a result, increasing trends of drug-resistant strains may complicate antibiotic recommendations.

Macrolide immunomodulatory effects and symptom resolution in acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis and acute maxillary sinusitis: a focus on clarithromycin

Bacterial respiratory tract infections are common in the primary care setting and patients often seek the assistance of a healthcare professional in order to achieve resolution of their symptoms. Antibiotic agents that offer rapid symptom relief, in addition to excellent bacteriological and clinical cure, are highly desired. Macrolides have proven to be highly effective in treating acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and acute maxillary sinusitis. In addition, immunomodulatory effects that may contribute to symptom resolution have been reported. This article reviews current literature on symptom resolution in acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and acute maxillary sinusitis, with a focus on clarithromycin, and explores the potential mechanisms that may contribute to this action.

Acute community-acquired bacterial sinusitis: continuing challenges and current management

Acute sinusitis is one of the most common infections seen in general clinical practice. The most common cause of acute sinusitis is viral; however, many patients receive a prescription for an antibiotic. Such injudicious prescribing habits have a major impact on health care costs, contribute to the increasing prevalence of drug-resistant strains of common respiratory pathogens, and reflect many of the challenges in differentiating viral and bacterial disease. Sinus puncture and culture of the aspirate, the diagnostic reference standard in the research setting, are not appropriate for routine clinical practice. However, certain clinical signs and symptoms that do not improve or that worsen after 7-10 days are currently accepted criteria for diagnosis of bacterial sinusitis. Accurate diagnosis can select patients who would benefit most from antimicrobial use. Antimicrobial agents should be selected on the basis of local resistance patterns, and their spectrum of activity should cover the common bacterial pathogens, including resistant strains.

Acute community-acquired bacterial sinusitis: the value of antimicrobial treatment and the natural history

Two areas of investigation were reviewed: (1) placebo-controlled trials of antimicrobial treatment involving patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute community-acquired bacterial sinusitis (ACABS) for whom pre- and posttherapy sinus aspirate cultures were not performed, and (2) uncontrolled trials of antimicrobial treatment involving patients with ACABS for whom pre- and posttherapy sinus aspirate cultures were performed. The clinical diagnostic criteria in the controlled trials were not correlated with sinus aspirate culture results and, thus, were of questionable validity. Most of the populations probably included patients with viral rhinosinusitis. In 10 uncontrolled studies, the posttreatment, weighted, pooled mean bacterial resolution rate (+/- standard error) at 7-10 days, based on sinus aspirate culture results, was 91%+/-10%. In 9 controlled trials, the weighted pooled mean rate of clinical improvement (+/- standard deviation) at 7-14 days for placebo recipients was 52%+/-18%. In 1 controlled trial in which diagnosis was based on duration of unimproved illness, 57% of placebo recipients and 85.5% of treated patients were healthy or had improved by day 10. Additional studies of ACABS are needed.

Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis

BACKGROUND

For adults seeking care in ambulatory medical practices, sinusitis is the most common diagnosis treated with antibiotics.

OBJECTIVES

We examined whether antibiotics are indicated for acute sinusitis, and if so, which antibiotic classes are most effective.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Relevant studies were identified from searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE in December 2001, contacts with pharmaceutical companies and bibliographies of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials were eligible that compared antibiotic to control or antibiotics from different classes, for acute maxillary sinusitis. Additional criteria for inclusion were diagnostic confirmation by radiograph or sinus aspiration, outcomes that included clinical cure or improvement, and a sample size of 30 or more adults. Of 2058 potentially relevant studies, two or more reviewers identified 49 studies meeting selection criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two persons and synthesized descriptively. Some data were analyzed quantitatively using a random effects model. Primary outcomes were: a) clinical cure, and b) clinical cure or improvement. Secondary outcomes were radiographic improvement, relapse rates, and dropouts due to adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine trials, involving 13,660 participants, evaluated antibiotic treatment for acute maxillary sinusitis. Major comparisons were antibiotic versus control (n of 5); newer, non-penicillin antibiotic versus penicillin class (n of 10); and amoxicillin-clavulanate versus other extended spectrum antibiotics (n of 17), where n is the number of trials. Most trials were conducted in otolaryngology settings. Only 8 trials described adequate allocation and concealment procedures; 20 were double-blind. Compared to control, penicillin improved clinical cures [relative risk (RR) 1.72; 95% CI 1.00 to 2.96]. Treatment with amoxicillin did not significantly improve cure rates (RR 2.06; 95% CI 0.65 to 6.53) but there was significant variability between studies. Radiographic outcomes were improved by antibiotic treatment. Comparisons between classes of antibiotics showed no significant differences: newer non-penicillins versus penicillins (RR for cure 1.07; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.17); newer non-penicillins versus amoxicillin-clavulanate (RR for cure 1.03; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.11). Compared to amoxicillin-clavulanate, dropouts due to adverse effects were significantly lower for cephalosporin antibiotics (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.73). Relapse rates within one month of successful therapy were 7.7%.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

For acute maxillary sinusitis confirmed radiographically or by aspiration, current evidence is limited but supports the use of penicillin or amoxicillin for 7 to 14 days. Clinicians should weigh the moderate benefits of antibiotic treatment against the potential for adverse effects.

Single dose of betamethasone in combined medical treatment of secretory otitis media

With the objective of evaluating the efficacy of cefixime and the combination of cefixime and betamethasone in the treatment of secretory otitis media (SOM), we enrolled 142 children 2 to 12 years old in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. All children suffered from SOM, verified by otomicroscopy and tympanometry, of at least 3 months' duration. Active treatment was a 10-day course of cefixime with and without a single dose of 6 mg betamethasone. On hundred forty children were available for efficacy evaluation 14 to 23 days after the start of treatment. A statistically significant treatment effect was found in the group treated with cefixime plus betamethasone (n = 59), with a 44.1% cure rate as compared to 19.7% in the cefixime-treated group (n = 61; p < .005) and 5% in the placebo group (n = 20; p < .005). Relapse rates were high and no statistically differences between groups remained at last valid visit. Adverse events possibly or probably associated with active treatment were reported in 11 cases (9.2%). One patient reported a severe adverse event. No serious events occurred. The study did not show any significant long-term effect of cefixime treatment or any long-term treatment benefit with the addition of betamethasone to the antibiotic.

An ultrasound device in the diagnosis of acute maxillary sinusitis

This multicenter study comprised 161 consecutive and unselected patients with suspected acute maxillary sinusitis (AMS). Altogether 322 maxillary sinuses were examined radiologically and by untrasound device (US). Of these, 234 antra were punctured, aspirated and irrigated. The volume of secretion coming out by irrigation was evaluated. The results of US, x-ray and irrigation were compared. For US, the proportion of correct positive results was 82.7% when the secretion volume was heavy, 78.6% when the secretion volume was moderate and 84.3% when the secretion volume was slight. When US finding was compared with the puncture result, the US gave false positive results in 8% of the cases and false negative results in 18.5% of the cases. Out of 187 positive irrigation findings, radiographs revealed fluid retention in 99 cases (score 3-6) (53%). Similarly, 11 radiographs showed fluid retention in 47 cases of negative irrigation findings (23.4%). Statistical calculation shows that both US and radiology were equally reliable in diagnosing fluid retention and sinusitis, when the results are compared with the findings of the sinus puncture. US and radiology gave false positive findings almost equally (p > 0.05). On the other hand, when the volume of secretion was slight (< 1 ml), US gave a fluid echo finding more often than radiology showed fluid retention.

Comparison of cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and ceftibuten

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the pharmacokinetics, spectrum of activity, clinical trials, and adverse effects of cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and ceftibuten, an investigational cephalosporin.

DATA SOURCES

Literature was identified by a MEDLINE search from 1986 to January 1995.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized, controlled studies were selected for evaluation; however, uncontrolled studies were included when data were limited for indications approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were evaluated with respect to in vitro activity, study design, clinical and microbiologic outcomes, and adverse drug reactions.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and cefributen are active in vitro against organisms frequently involved in community-acquired infections such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, beta-lactamase-positive or -negative Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis. Except for cefixime and ceflibuten, they all are active against methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Even though there were problems in study design (discussed within the text), clinical data demonstrate that these new oral beta-lactam compounds are as efficacious as conventional therapies for a variety of community-acquired infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Cefprozil, cefpodoxime, cefixime, loracarbef, and ceftibuten demonstrate in vitro activity against the major organisms that cause community-acquired infections. Clinical trials confirm that these agents are as effective as traditional therapies for the management of acute otitis media, pharyngitis/tonsillitis, sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, and skin and skin-structure infections. In addition, cefixime and cefpodoxime are effective therapies for uncomplicated gonococcal infections. Selection of a specific agent will be influenced by susceptibility data and safety, as well as issues of compliance and cost.

Treatment of acute maxillary sinusitis--comparing cefpodoxime proxetil with amoxicillin

In order to evaluate the clinical efficacy and tolerance of cefpodoxime proxetil, compared with that of amoxicillin in the treatment of acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis, a randomized, double-blind, parallel group comparative study was performed. A total of 286 adults patients were included at 12 centres, each treatment group consisting of 143 patients. Each patient was treated for 10 days and observed before and after treatment. The observations included clinical, roentgenological, bacteriological and laboratory examinations. At inclusion, the most common pathogens were Haemophilus influenzae (24%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (17%). In the per protocol analysis, 117 patients in the cefpodoxime group and 113 in the amoxicillin group were evaluable for clinical efficacy. The clinical response rates were 96% and 91%, respectively. The corresponding figures in the intent-to-treat analysis were 130 and 128 patients, with clinical response rates of 93% and 88%, respectively. Cefpodoxime proxetil proved clinically as effective as amoxicillin in the treatment of acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis. It was more effective in eradicating H. influenzae and was more efficient in improving the radiological score. Adverse events were reported in 20% of cefpodoxime cases and in 16% of amoxicillin cases. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups.