Extended-Interval Aminoglycoside Administration for Children: A Meta-analysis
- 1 July 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in Pediatrics
- Vol. 114 (1) , e111-e118
- https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.114.1.e111
Abstract
Background. There has been a long-standing debate regarding whether aminoglycosides should be administered on a multiple daily dosing (MDD) or once-daily dosing (ODD) schedule. Several unique characteristics of the aminoglycosides make ODD an attractive and possibly superior alternative to MDD. These include concentration-dependent bactericidal activity; postantibiotic effect, which allows continued efficacy even when serum concentrations fall below expected minimum inhibitory concentrations; decreased risk of adaptive resistance; and diminished accumulation in renal tubules and inner ear. Objective. To assess the relative efficacy and toxicity of ODD, compared with MDD, of aminoglycosides among pediatric patients. Study Selection. Randomized, controlled trials among children, evaluating the relative efficacy and toxicity of ODD versus MDD of aminoglycosides, with similar total daily doses in the compared arms, were selected. Data Sources. PubMed (1966–2003) and Embase (1982–2003) databases, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry (2003), and references of eligible studies and pediatric review articles were searched. Data Extraction. Study population characteristics and outcome data were extracted independently in duplicate, and consensus was reached on all items. The following outcome data were considered: (1) clinical or microbiologic failure, as defined in each study; (2) clinical failure; (3) microbiologic failure; (4) primary nephrotoxicity, ie, any rise in serum creatinine or decrease in creatinine clearance with thresholds as defined in each study; (5) secondary nephrotoxicity, ie, urinary excretion of proteins or phospholipids; and (6) ototoxicity based on pure tone audiometry, brainstem auditory evoked responses, or otoacoustic emissions for neonates and infants, vestibular testing, clinical impression, or any other method. All of the efficacy and toxicity outcomes were evaluated at the end of therapy. Results. Identification of eligible studies and study characteristics: 24 eligible studies published between 1991 and 2003 were identified. Aminoglycosides were used in different clinical settings (neonatal intensive care unit: 6 studies; cystic fibrosis: 3 studies; cancer: 5 studies; urinary tract infections: 4 studies; diverse infectious indications: 5 studies; pediatric intensive care unit: 1 study). Aminoglycosides used included amikacin (9 studies), gentamicin (11 studies), tobramycin (2 studies), netilmicin (2 studies), and tobramycin or netilmicin (1 study). Efficacy: There was no significant difference between ODD and MDD in the clinical failure rate, microbiologic failure rate, and combined clinical or microbiologic failure rates, but trends favored ODD consistently. There was no between-study heterogeneity for any outcome. Efficacy analysis of all trials indicating either clinical or microbiologic failures demonstrated pooled failure rates of 4.6% (23 of 501 cases) in the ODD arms and 6.9% (34 of 494 cases) in the MDD arms. The fixed-effects risk ratio was 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45–1.11). A statistically significant benefit was seen with ODD over MDD in trials using amikacin, whereas no statistical significance was seen in trials using other antibiotics. The pooled clinical failure rates were 6.7% (22 of 330 cases) in the ODD arms and 10.4% (34 of 327 cases) in the MDD arms. The fixed-effects risk ratio was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.42–1.07). The pooled microbiologic failure rates were 1.8% (5 of 283 cases) with ODD and 4.0% (11 of 275 cases) with MDD. The fixed-effects risk ratio was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.22–1.18). Nephrotoxicity: There was no significant difference between ODD and MDD in the primary nephrotoxicity outcomes. Secondary nephrotoxicity outcomes were significantly better with ODD. The pooled primary nephrotoxicity rates were 1.6% (15 of 955 cases) in the ODD arms and 1.6% (15 of 923 cases) in the MDD arms. The fixed-effects risk ratio was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.55–1.69). The pooled secondary nephrotoxicity rates were 4.4% (3 of 69 cases) in the ODD arms and 15.9% (11 of 69 cases) in the MDD arms, suggesting a statistically significant superiority of ODD. The fixed-effects risk ratio was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.12–0.89). Results were consistent across types of clinical settings and aminoglycosides. Ototoxicity: There was no significant difference between ODD and MDD in the primary ototoxicity outcomes. The pooled ototoxicity rates for studies that provided auditory testing results were 2.3% (10 of 436 cases) in the ODD arms and 2.0% (8 of 406 cases) in the MDD arms. The fixed-effects risk ratio was 1.06 (95% CI: 0.51–2.19). In studies that provided clinical vestibular function testing results, no toxicity was documented among 209 patients given ODD and 206 patients given MDD. Studies noting only the clinical impression of hearing impairment also failed to identify any toxicity (ODD: 114 cases; MDD: 114 cases). Subgroup and bias analyses: We detected no statistically significant differences between ODD and MDD in any of the examined subgroups (neonatal intensive care unit, cystic fibrosis, cancer, or urinary tract infection), with respect to combined clinical or microbiologic failure outcomes, primary nephrotoxicity outcomes, or ototoxicity (based on auditory testing), when sufficient data were available. Moreover, there was no significant relationship between the effect size (risk ratio) and the trial size for any of the outcomes. Data Interpretation. Clinical failures were uncommon in the pediatric trials, regardless of the regimen used. If anything, fewer clinical failures tended to occur with ODD. Moreover, we observed a trend toward decreased bacteriologic failures. One meta-analysis of adult data suggested that ODD might reduce nephrotoxicity, whereas other meta-analyses showed nonsignificant trends or no difference in nephrotoxicity outcomes. In our meta-analysis, we were not able to show any reduction in the risk...Keywords
This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Treatment of urinary tract infection with gentamicin once or three times dailyActa Paediatrica, 2003
- Comparison of Once-Daily Versus Twice-Daily Gentamicin Dosing Regimens in Infants ≥2500 gJournal of Perinatology, 2002
- Once- Versus Twice-daily Gentamicin Dosing in Neonates ≥34 Weeks' Gestation: Cost-effectiveness AnalysesPublished by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) ,1999
- Efficacy, tolerance, and pharmacokinetics of once daily tobramycin for pseudomonas exacerbations in cystic fibrosisArchives of Disease in Childhood, 1998
- Once daily ceftriaxone plus amikacin vs. three times daily ceftazidime plus amikacin for treatment of febrile neutropenic children with cancerThe Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 1997
- A meta-analysis of studies on the safety and efficacy of aminoglycosides given either once daily or as divided dosesJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 1996
- Gentamicin once-daily versus thrice-daily in childrenJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 1995
- Aminoglykoside bei Patienten mit Mukoviszidose und pulmonaler Exazerbation: Vergleich von Einmal- und DreimalgabeKlinische Padiatrie, 1993
- Adaptive Resistance to Aminoglycoside Antibiotics from First-Exposure Down-RegulationThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1990
- Kinetics of gentamicin uptake and release in the rat. Comparison of inner ear tissues and fluids with other organs.Journal of Clinical Investigation, 1986