Evidence Hub

Comparison of high-dose, short-course levofloxacin treatment vs conventional regimen against acute bacterial infection: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Chih‐Wei Chen, Yu‐Hung Chen, I-Ling Cheng, Chih‐Cheng Lai

Infection and Drug Resistance, 2019

3,731 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

Objects: This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of high-dose, short-dose levofloxacin in comparison with conventional therapy on treating acute bacterial infection. Methods: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database were searched up to September 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating high-dose, short-course levofloxacin and conventional regimen in the treatment of acute bacterial infection were included. The primary outcomes were clinical responses, microbiologic eradication and adverse effects. Results: Seven RCTs of 3,731 patients (1,835 in the high-dose, short-course levofloxacin regimen group and 1,896 in the conventional regimen group) were included. Overall, no significant difference between the high-dose, short-course levofloxacin regimen group and the conventional regimen was found in terms of clinical response (risk ratio, RR: 1.01; 95%CI: 0.98–1.04, I 2, =10%). In addition, the high-dose, short-course levofloxacin regimen had a similar microbiological eradication rate to conventional regimen (RR: 1.02; 95%CI: 0.98–1.06, I 2, =0%). Moreover, the high-dose, short-course levofloxacin regimen had a similar incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events to conventional regimen (RR: 1.07; 95%CI: 0.99–1.17, I 2, =0%). This trend was not affected by the different types of infections—community-acquired pneumonia, complicated urinary tract infection/acute pyelonephritis or acute sinusitis, different conventional regimen—levofloxacin (500 mg…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, 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: 3,731 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