Short versus prolonged duration of therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

The optimal duration of therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection (PSA-BSI) is unknown, with prolonged therapy frequently favored due to severity of infection, patient complexity, risk of multi-drug resistance, and high mortality. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies with head-to-head comparison of short versus prolonged therapy for PSA-BSI. A comprehensive search including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was performed. We pooled risk ratios using DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and performed subgroup analysis of outcomes including all-cause mortality, recurrent infection, and composite of these outcomes among patients receiving short versus prolonged therapy for PSA-BSI. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I²-index. Risk of bias for cohort studies was assessed using ROBINS-I tool. Of the 908 identified studies, six were included in the systematic review and five studies with head-to-head comparison of treatment duration were assessed in the meta-analysis, totalling 1746 patients. No significant difference in propensity score-weighted composite outcome (30-day all-cause mortality or recurrent infection) was noted between patients receiving short or prolonged therapy, with a pooled RR risk ratio of 0.80 (95% CI confidence interval 0.51-1.25, P=0.32; I² = 0%). Additionally, duration of therapy did not impact individual outcomes of 30-day all-cause mortality or recurrent/persistent infection. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that short duration of antimicrobial therapy may have similar efficacy to prolonged treatment for PSA-BSI. Future randomized trials will be necessary to definitively determine optimal management of PSA bacteraemia.

Keywords: Antibiotics; Antimicrobial stewardship; Bacteraemia; Duration; Pseudomonas aeruginosa.