Literature DB >> 18254024

Antibiotics and antiseptics for venous leg ulcers.

S O'Meara1, D Al-Kurdi, L G Ovington.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Venous leg ulcers are a type of chronic wound affecting up to 1% of adults in developed countries at some point during their life. Many of these wounds are colonised by bacteria or show signs of clinical infection. The presence of infection may delay ulcer healing. There are two main strategies used to prevent and treat clinical infection in venous leg ulcers: systemic antibiotics and topical antibiotics or antiseptics.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the review is to determine the effects of systemic antibiotics and topical antibiotics and antiseptics on the healing of venous ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: The following databases were searched up to October 2007: the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; EMBASE; and CINAHL. In addition, the reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles were examined. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials recruiting people with venous leg ulceration that evaluated at least one systemic antibiotic, topical antibiotic or topical antiseptic and reported an objective assessment of wound healing (e.g. time to complete healing, frequency of complete healing, change in ulcer surface area) were eligible for inclusion. Selection decisions were made by three authors working independently. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information on the characteristics of participants, interventions and outcomes were recorded on a standardised data extraction form. In addition, aspects of trial methods were extracted, including methods of randomisation and allocation concealment, use of blinded outcome assessment, intention-to-treat analysis, reporting of patient follow-up and study group comparability at baseline. Data extraction and validity assessment were conducted by one author and checked by a second. MAIN
RESULTS: Twenty two trials were identified of different antibiotics and antiseptics, including systemic antibiotics (5 trials). The remainder were topical preparations: cadexomer iodine (10 trials); povidone iodine (2 trials); peroxide-based preparations (3 trials); ethacridine lactate (1 trial); and mupirocin (1 trial). For the systemic antibiotics, the only comparison where a statistically significant between-group difference was detected was that in favour of the antihelminthic levamisole when compared with placebo. This trial, in common with the other evaluations of systemic antibiotics, was small and so the observed effect could have occurred by chance. In terms of topical preparations, there is some evidence to suggest that cadexomer iodine generates higher healing rates than standard care. One study showed a statistically significant result in favour of cadexomer iodine when compared with standard care (not involving compression) in terms of frequency of complete healing at six weeks (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.74). The intervention regimen used was intensive, involving daily dressing changes, and so these findings may not be generalisable to most everyday clinical settings. When cadexomer iodine was compared with standard care with all patients receiving compression, the pooled estimate from two trials for frequency of complete healing at 4 to 6 weeks indicated significantly higher healing rates for cadexomer iodine (RR 6.72, 95% CI 1.56 to 28.95). Surrogate healing outcomes such as change in ulcer surface area and daily or weekly healing rate showed favourable results for cadexomer iodine, peroxide-based preparations and ethacridine lactate in some studies. These surrogate outcomes may not be valid proxies for complete healing of the wound. Most of the trials were small and many had methodological problems such as poor baseline comparability between groups, failure to use (or report) true randomisation, adequate allocation concealment, blinded outcome assessment and analysis by intention-to-treat. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is no existing evidence to support the routine use of systemic antibiotics to promote healing in venous leg ulcers. However, the lack of reliable evidence means that it is not possible to recommend the discontinuation of any of the agents reviewed. In terms of topical preparations, there is some evidence to support the use of cadexomer iodine. Further good quality research is required before definitive conclusions can be made about the effectiveness of systemic antibiotics and topical preparations such as povidone iodine, peroxide-based preparations, ethacridine lactate and mupirocin in healing venous leg ulceration. In light of the increasing problem of bacterial resistance to antibiotics, current prescribing guidelines recommend that antibacterial preparations should only be used in cases of defined infection and not for bacterial colonisation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18254024     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003557.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  13 in total

1.  Wound infection, dressings and pain, is there a relationship in the chronic wound?

Authors:  K F Cutting; R J White; P Mahoney
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-05-28       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Evidence-based wound care in the UK.

Authors:  David Leaper
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 3.  Recommendations on negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and antimicrobial solutions - when, where and how to use: what does the evidence show?

Authors:  David A Back; Catharina Scheuermann-Poley; Christian Willy
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  Letter: evidence-based wound care in the UK: a response to David Leaper's editorial in International Wound Journal April 2009 6 (2).

Authors:  Sally Bell-Syer; Marian Brady; Julie Bruce; Nicky Cullum; Ruth Foxlee; Andrew Jull; David Margolis; Liz McInnes; Andre Nelson; Susan O'Meara; Dirk Ubbink
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 5.  Extending the TIME concept: what have we learned in the past 10 years?(*).

Authors:  David J Leaper; Gregory Schultz; Keryln Carville; Jacqueline Fletcher; Theresa Swanson; Rebecca Drake
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.315

6.  Prospective, Descriptive Study of Critically Colonized Venous Leg Ulcers Managed With Silver Containing Absorbent Dressings and Compression.

Authors:  Michael F Moore
Journal:  J Am Coll Clin Wound Spec       Date:  2014-09-16

7.  [A comparative in vitro study of cell toxicity of clinically used antiseptics].

Authors:  T Hirsch; F Jacobsen; A Rittig; O Goertz; A Niederbichler; H U Steinau; H M Seipp; L Steinstraesser
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 0.751

8.  Comparison of culture and molecular identification of bacteria in chronic wounds.

Authors:  Daniel D Rhoads; Randall D Wolcott; Yan Sun; Scot E Dowd
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 6.208

9.  Community analysis of chronic wound bacteria using 16S rRNA gene-based pyrosequencing: impact of diabetes and antibiotics on chronic wound microbiota.

Authors:  Lance B Price; Cindy M Liu; Johan H Melendez; Yelena M Frankel; David Engelthaler; Maliha Aziz; Jolene Bowers; Rogan Rattray; Jacques Ravel; Chris Kingsley; Paul S Keim; Gerald S Lazarus; Jonathan M Zenilman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Impact of lower extremity venous ulcers due to chronic venous insufficiency on quality of life.

Authors:  Sotirios A Koupidis; Kosmas I Paraskevas; Vassilios Stathopoulos; Dimitri P Mikhailidis
Journal:  Open Cardiovasc Med J       Date:  2008-11-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.