Next Article in Journal
Bacteriophages as Alternatives to Antibiotics in Clinical Care
Next Article in Special Issue
Characterization of LysBC17, a Lytic Endopeptidase from Bacillus cereus
Previous Article in Journal
Longitudinal Shedding Patterns and Characterization of Antibiotic Resistant E. coli in Pastured Goats Using a Cohort Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparative In Vitro Activities of First and Second-Generation Ceragenins Alone and in Combination with Antibiotics Against Multidrug-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Strains
Open AccessArticle

Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

1
School of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Medical Technology, Putian University, Putian 351100, China
2
Department of Orthopedic, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan 71004, Taiwan
3
Department of Physical Therapy, Shu Zen Junior College of Medicine and Management, Kaohsiung 82144, Taiwan
4
Yijia Pharmacy, Tainan 70846, Taiwan
5
School of Management, Putian University, Putian 351100, China
6
Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Chi Mei Medical Center, Liouying 73657, Taiwan
7
Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Tainan Branch, Tainan 71051, Taiwan
8
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infection Disease, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Tainan Branch, Tainan 71051, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
The two authors contributed equally.
Antibiotics 2019, 8(3), 137; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics8030137
Received: 5 August 2019 / Revised: 29 August 2019 / Accepted: 2 September 2019 / Published: 4 September 2019
This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of tedizolid, compared to linezolid, in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI). PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO (Elton B. Stephens Co.), Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline and Embase databases were accessed until 18 July 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tedizolid with linezolid for adult patients with ABSSSIs were included. The outcomes included the clinical response, microbiological response, and risk of adverse events (AEs). A total of four RCTs involving 2056 adult patients with ABSSSI were enrolled. The early clinical response rate was 79.6% and 80.5% for patients receiving tedizolid and linezolid, respectively. The pooled analysis showed that tedizolid had a non-inferior early clinical response rate to linezolid (odds ratio (OR) = 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.77–1.19, I2 = 0%). The early response rate was similar between tedizolid and linezolid among patients with cellulitis/erysipelas (75.1% vs. 77.1%; OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.64–1.27, I2 = 25%), major cutaneous abscess (85.1% vs. 86.8%; OR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.42–2.03, I2 = 37%) and wound infection (85.9% vs. 82.6%; OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.66–2.51, I2 = 45%). For methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus patients, tedizolid had a favorable microbiological response rate of 95.2% which was comparable to linezolid (94%) (OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.49–2.90, I2 = 0%). In addition to the similar risk of treatment-emergent AEs (a serious event, the discontinuation of the study drug due to AEs and mortality between tedizolid and linezolid), tedizolid was associated with a lower risk of nausea, vomiting and abnormal neutrophil count than linezolid. In conclusion, once-daily tedizolid (200 mg for six days) compared to linezolid (600 mg twice-daily for 10 days) was non-inferior in efficacy in the treatment of ABSSSI. Besides, tedizolid was generally as well tolerated as linezolid, and had a lower incidence of gastrointestinal AEs and bone marrow suppression than linezolid. View Full-Text
Keywords: tedizolid; linezolid; acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection tedizolid; linezolid; acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Lan, S.-H.; Lin, W.-T.; Chang, S.-P.; Lu, L.-C.; Chao, C.-M.; Lai, C.-C.; Wang, J.-H. Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Antibiotics 2019, 8, 137.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop