Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30112254›Full record

ReviewCureus2018

Fidaxomicin vs Vancomycin for the Treatment of a First Episode of Clostridium Difficile Infection: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

Laith A Al Momani, Omar Abughanimeh, Boonphiphop Boonpheng, Joseph Gabriel Gabriel, Mark Young

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Autopsy & case reports · 2023
    Article
  9. Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Review
  10. The Risk ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Updates and Opinions in Diagnosis and Treatment ofCurrent treatment options in pediatrics · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
  14. South African Society of Clinical MicrobiologySouthern African journal of infectious diseases · 2020
    Article
  15. Management of adult Clostridium difficile digestive contaminations: a literature review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laith A Al MomaniDepartment of Internal Medicine, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, USA.
Omar AbughanimehDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, USA.
Boonphiphop BoonphengDepartment of Internal Medicine, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, USA.
Joseph Gabriel GabrielDepartment of Internal Medicine, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, USA.
Mark YoungDepartment of Gastroenterology, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, USA.
East Tennessee State University · USUniversity of Missouri–Kansas City · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) continues to possess a significant disease burden in the United States (US) as well as all over the world. Given the increase in severity and recurrence rate, the decrease in cure rate, and the fact that the virulent ribotype 027 strain remains one of the most commonly identified strains in the US, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) published a clinical practice guideline in February 2018 moving away from metronidazole as the first-line treatment for initial CDI and recommending either oral vancomycin or fidaxomicin. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical data available comparing the efficacy of primary treatment of CDI between those two antibiotics. We performed a PubMed, PubMed Central, and ScienceDirect database search without restriction to regions, publication types, or languages. A comprehensive literature search was performed from January 1, 1980 up to March 20, 2018. We used the following keywords in different combinations: Clostridium difficile, Clostridium difficile infection, CDI, C. diff, C. difficile, fidaxomicin, vancomycin, pseudomembranous colitis, and antibiotic-associated colitis. The search was limited to human studies. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers with disagreements resolved by a third author. We pooled an odds ratio (OR) on two primary outcomes: Clinical cure rate and rate of recurrence during the follow-up period. The computer search was also supplemented with manual searches by the authors of the retrieved review articles and primary studies. The search phrase "((Clostridium difficile) AND vancomycin) AND fidaxomicin" had the highest yield results. We identified four observational studies with a total of 2,303 patients with CDI that met our inclusion criteria. Compared with vancomycin, fidaxomicin use was associated with a significantly lower recurrence of CDI with a pooled OR of 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37 - 0.60, I2 = 0). On the other hand, there was no significant association of fidaxomicin use with CDI cure rate compared to vancomycin with a pooled OR of 1.22 (95% CI, 0.93 - 1.60, I2 = 0). In light of the recently updated clinical practice guidelines by the IDSA, our review suggests that fidaxomicin has a more sustained clinical response with a statistically significant lower recurrence rate. Although fidaxomicin appears to be the better drug with statistical significance, its cost-effectiveness continues to be an ongoing controversy. More randomized clinical trials are needed to shed light on this matter to assess if there is any clinical significance in fidaxomicin superiority.

Indexed as

c. diffc. difficileclostridium difficilefidaxomicintreatment of clostridium difficilevancomycin

Identifiers

PMID30112254
PMCPMC6089486
OpenAlexW2807990212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.