Background <p>Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are common in young children and women and even more so in pregnant women. Ciprofloxacin has been a long-used regime to treat UTIs, although recently the paradigm has shifted towards Fosfomycin. This shift is driven by rising antibiotic resistance, safety concerns with fluoroquinolones, and the need for alternative treatments with broader efficacy and fewer adverse effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis assess the effectiveness and safety of Fosfomycin compared to Ciprofloxacin for treating urinary tract infections in adults.</p> Methods <p>A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus using search strings combining “Fosfomycin,” “Ciprofloxacin,” and “urinary tract infections.” Study selection and screening were managed using Covidence, with duplicates removed. Four randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria following primary and secondary screening. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan), with results presented as forest plots. A random-effects model was applied in cases of significant heterogeneity. The outcomes assessed included clinical remission, bacterial eradication, and adverse effects, based on data from three of the included studies.</p> Results <p>Four studies matched our inclusion criteria and were processed further for analysis. For bacterial eradication, the total number of patients was 334 patients, bacterial eradication during 10&#xa0;days was achieved in 143 participants in the fosfomycin group and 110 participants in the ciprofloxacin group. Bacterial eradication was significantly higher in the fosfomycin group compared to the ciprofloxacin group (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.22–3.36, <i>p</i> = 0.006). For clinical remission, no significant difference was found in 3 studies in a total of 278 patients (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.72–2.21, <i>p</i> = 0.42). Out of a total of 356 patients, 74 experienced adverse effects in the fosfomycin group and 46 in the ciprofloxacin group. The appearance of adverse effects was significantly higher in the fosfomycin group (OR 2.66, CI 1.53–4.62, <i>p</i> = 0.0005).</p> Conclusion <p>The results of our meta-analysis show that bacterial eradication was significantly higher in the Fosfomycin group compared to the Ciprofloxacin group. There was no difference between the two drugs in terms of clinical remission. The appearance of adverse effects was significantly higher in the Fosfomycin group. Despite a higher incidence of adverse effects, Fosfomycin demonstrated superior bacterial eradication, suggesting its potential role as an effective empirical option, particularly in regions with elevated fluoroquinolone resistance. Hence, it was deduced that Fosfomycin is more effective than Ciprofloxacin for bacterial eradication in the treatment of urinary tract infections. These findings are influenced by significant heterogeneity in study design, populations, and outcome definitions, which should be considered when interpreting the pooled estimates.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Comparing fosfomycin and ciprofloxacin for uncomplicated UTI treatment in adults: better bacterial eradication but non-significant clinical remission—a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Muhammad Usman Hashmi,
  • Yasmeen Sufi,
  • Tamseela Zahoor,
  • Hifza Hameed,
  • Rimsha Ejaz,
  • Nida Nisar,
  • Rubab Zahra,
  • Hussain Ramzan,
  • Kundan Kumar,
  • Lava Abdullah

摘要

Background

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are common in young children and women and even more so in pregnant women. Ciprofloxacin has been a long-used regime to treat UTIs, although recently the paradigm has shifted towards Fosfomycin. This shift is driven by rising antibiotic resistance, safety concerns with fluoroquinolones, and the need for alternative treatments with broader efficacy and fewer adverse effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis assess the effectiveness and safety of Fosfomycin compared to Ciprofloxacin for treating urinary tract infections in adults.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus using search strings combining “Fosfomycin,” “Ciprofloxacin,” and “urinary tract infections.” Study selection and screening were managed using Covidence, with duplicates removed. Four randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria following primary and secondary screening. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan), with results presented as forest plots. A random-effects model was applied in cases of significant heterogeneity. The outcomes assessed included clinical remission, bacterial eradication, and adverse effects, based on data from three of the included studies.

Results

Four studies matched our inclusion criteria and were processed further for analysis. For bacterial eradication, the total number of patients was 334 patients, bacterial eradication during 10 days was achieved in 143 participants in the fosfomycin group and 110 participants in the ciprofloxacin group. Bacterial eradication was significantly higher in the fosfomycin group compared to the ciprofloxacin group (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.22–3.36, p = 0.006). For clinical remission, no significant difference was found in 3 studies in a total of 278 patients (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.72–2.21, p = 0.42). Out of a total of 356 patients, 74 experienced adverse effects in the fosfomycin group and 46 in the ciprofloxacin group. The appearance of adverse effects was significantly higher in the fosfomycin group (OR 2.66, CI 1.53–4.62, p = 0.0005).

Conclusion

The results of our meta-analysis show that bacterial eradication was significantly higher in the Fosfomycin group compared to the Ciprofloxacin group. There was no difference between the two drugs in terms of clinical remission. The appearance of adverse effects was significantly higher in the Fosfomycin group. Despite a higher incidence of adverse effects, Fosfomycin demonstrated superior bacterial eradication, suggesting its potential role as an effective empirical option, particularly in regions with elevated fluoroquinolone resistance. Hence, it was deduced that Fosfomycin is more effective than Ciprofloxacin for bacterial eradication in the treatment of urinary tract infections. These findings are influenced by significant heterogeneity in study design, populations, and outcome definitions, which should be considered when interpreting the pooled estimates.