Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments for Bacterial Vaginosis: A Network Meta-Analysis
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-6382/10/8/978
Abstract
Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a common vaginal
dysbiosis in women of reproductive age. However, the cure rate for BV varies
considerably and many women experience a relapse after the initial treatment.
The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical cure rates (CCRs) in
randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through different therapies and
administration routes. This meta-analysis included a final set of 25 eligible
studies with a total of 57 RCTs and compared the effectiveness of BV treatments
among non-pregnant and pregnant women. The initial range of CCRs varied greatly
from 46.75% to 96.20% and the final pooled CCR was 75.5% (CI: 69.4–80.8) using
the random model. The heterogeneity indices were Q = 418.91, I2 = 94.27%, and τ = 0.7498 (p < 0.0001). No publication bias was observed
according to Funnel plot symmetry and Egger’s linear regression test (p =
0.1097). To evaluate different variables, sub-group analysis, meta-regressions,
and network meta-analysis were also realized. The highest P-scores in CCR were
obtained by: (1) a combined therapy with local probiotic treatment and
application of antibiotics by both administration route (oral clindamycin and
local 5-nitroimidazole; P-score = 0.92); (2) a combined therapy with oral
administration of 5-nitroimidazole and probiotic treatment (P-score = 0.82);
(3) and a combined therapy with local administration of 5-nitroimidazole and
oral probiotic treatment (P-score = 0.68). A clear-cut decision of the best BV
treatment was not possible due to the heterogeneity of outcomes reported in the
trials, indicating the necessity for a better characterization of RCTs.
Finally, combined therapies suggested the reduction of the optimal
concentration of antibiotics, and double phase treatments of antibiotics
indicated an increment of CCRs in BV. View Full-Text
Keywords: bacterial vaginosis; antibiotics; probiotics; combined therapies; randomized controlled
trials; meta-analysis
0 comentarios