Ertapenem versus ceftriaxone for the treatment of complicated infections: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Background: Ertapenem has been demonstrated to be highly effective for the treatment of complicated infections. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ertapenem with ceftriaxone.

Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and safety of ertapenem with ceftriaxone for the treatment of complicated infections including community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs), and complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs). Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.0.

Results: Eight RCTs, involving 2 883 patients, were included in our meta-analysis. Ertapenem was associated with similar clinical treatment success with ceftriaxone for complicated infections (1 326 patients, fixed-effect model, OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.75-1.71). There was no difference between the compared treatment groups with regard to the microbiological treatment success, and no difference was found with regard to the incidence of clinical and laboratory drug-related adverse events between ertapenem and ceftriaxone groups. As to local tolerability, overall, there was no difference between the compared groups; however, in the subgroup analysis, local reaction was significantly less in the ertapenem subgroup than the ceftriaxone plus ceftriaxone subgroup.

Conclusions: Ertapenem can be used as effectively and safely as ceftriaxone for the treatment of complicated infections. It is an appealing option for the treatment of these complicated infections.