Evidence Hub

Efficacy and treatment outcome of infected patients with pulmonary Mycobacterium kansasii: A systematic review

Fatemeh Andalibi, Narjess Bostanghadiri, Nour Amirmozafari, Gholamreza Irajian, Shiva Mirkalantari

Journal of Clinical Tuberculosis and Other Mycobacterial Diseases, 2024

1,201 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Mycobacterium kansasii (M. kansasii) is a non-tuberculosis bacterium with a highly prevalent that is transferred by aerosols from water and soil resources to the respiratory system. M. kansasii is one of the main species responsible for NTM pulmonary disease. Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases were systematically explored. Relevant articles from 1971 to November 2023 were reviewed. “The inclusion criteria” included patients with M. kansasii infection, treatment follow-up, and treatment outcomes. “The exclusion criteria” were clinical samples from animals, environmental samples, and other laboratory investigations. 40 studies, including 1201 patients, were obtained through database search. Using the therapeutic regimens used in different studies, the therapy course for patients with M. kansasii infection ranged from 1 week to 118 months. In this study, the antibiotics prescribed in different treatment regimens for M. kansasii pulmonary infection were as follows: Rifampin, Ethambutol, Isoniazid, Clarithromycin, Streptomycin, and Pyrazinamide. Antibiotic combinations of three or four medicines, including rifampin, ethambutol, and isoniazid with or without streptomycin or pyrazinamide had the most therapeutic effect. The initial treatment involves rifampin, ethambutol, isoniazid, and pyridoxine, per the guidelines from the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). Understanding the treatment plan and its outcomes is crucial…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,201 participants or records.

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