Extended or continuous versus short-term intravenous infusion of cephalosporins: a meta-analysis

Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2013 Jun;11(6):585-95. doi: 10.1586/eri.13.44.

Abstract

The authors sought to study whether extended or continuous infusion of cephalosporins is associated with better clinical outcomes than short-term infusion. PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched. Studies reporting the clinical outcomes of patients receiving extended or continuous infusion (≥3 or 24 h, respectively) versus short-term infusion (≤1 h) of cephalosporins were considered eligible. Eleven studies (1250 clinically evaluable patients) were included. Clinical cure and mortality were not statistically different between the compared groups (risk ratio: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.94-1.37 and risk ratio: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.80-1.15, respectively). This meta-analysis did not show a difference in clinical cure or mortality regarding extended or continuous versus short-term intravenous infusion of cephalosporins. However, in most of the included studies, patients in the extended/continuous infusion group received a substantially lower total dosage of antibiotic than those in the short-term group for the total duration of treatment.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Meta-Analysis

MeSH terms

  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / therapeutic use*
  • Cephalosporins / therapeutic use*
  • Databases, Bibliographic
  • Drug Administration Schedule
  • Gram-Negative Bacteria / drug effects
  • Gram-Negative Bacteria / physiology
  • Gram-Positive Bacteria / drug effects
  • Gram-Positive Bacteria / physiology
  • Humans
  • Infusions, Intravenous
  • Pneumonia / drug therapy*
  • Pneumonia / microbiology
  • Risk Factors
  • Sepsis / drug therapy*
  • Sepsis / microbiology
  • Treatment Outcome

Substances

  • Anti-Bacterial Agents
  • Cephalosporins