Evidence Hub

Carbapenem vs. non-carbapenem antibiotics for ventilator-associated pneumonia: A systematic review with meta-analysis

H. Shuto, Kosaku Komiya, K. Tone, Hiroyuki Matsumoto, Hiroshi Moro, N. Shime

Respiratory Investigation, 2024

2 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Carbapenem is recommended as one of the first-line regimens for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), but no recent systematic review has fully investigated its efficacy. This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy of carbapenem compared with non-carbapenem for VAP treatment.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the efficacy and the safety between carbapenem and non-carbapenem with activity to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the treatment for VAP. The main outcome was mortality, and the additional outcomes were the clinical cure of pneumonia, length of intensive care unit stay, recurrence, adverse effects, and the development of resistant bacteria. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Of the initial 1,730 publications, 9 randomized control trials were enrolled. In the meta-analysis, no difference was observed between the carbapenem and non-carbapenem regimens in improving mortality (odds ratio, 0.83; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.02). While the carbapenem regimen was superior to the non-carbapenem regimen in studies reporting the resolution of pneumonia (odds ratio, 1.09; 95 % CI 1.01-1.17), the effectiveness of carbapenem treatment was not evident in studies assessing the other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Carbapenem might have no superiority in survival when treating VAP. Moreover, non-carbapenem antibiotics…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free