Abstract

Long-term macrolides are increasingly being prescribed for stable bronchiectasis. This meta-analysis assessed the clinical effect of this treatment in bronchiectasis. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. All randomized, controlled trials (RCT) comparing long-term macrolides with placebo and/or usual medical care, with outcome measures relating to efficacy and safety were selected. Nine RCT recruiting 530 patients were included. Compared with placebo and/or usual medical care, long-term macrolides significantly reduced the risk of the exacerbations (number of participants with exacerbations (relative risk = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.82, P < 0.00001); average exacerbations per participant (weighted mean difference = -1.01, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.67, P < 0.00001)), the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total scores (weighted mean difference = -5.39 95% CI -9.89 to -0.88, P = 0.02), dyspnoea scale (weighted mean difference = -0.31 95% CI -0.42 to -0.20, P < 0.00001), 24-h sputum volume (P < 0.00001), and attenuated the decline of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (weighted mean difference 0.02 L, 95% CI 0.00-0.04, P = 0.01). Eradication of pathogens (P = 0.06), overall rate of adverse events (P = 0.61), and emergence of new pathogens (P = 0.61) were not elevated, while gastrointestinal events increased significantly with macrolides (P = 0.0001). Macrolide resistance increased, but a meta-analysis was not possible due to the diversity of parameters. Long-term use of macrolides appears to be a treatment option for stable bronchiectasis. The results of this review justify further investigation about adding this intervention to the treatment regimens of bronchiectasis.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call