Combination antibiotic susceptibility testing to treat exacerbations of cystic fibrosis associated with multiresistant bacteria: a randomised, double-blind, controlled clinical trial. Elective versus symptomatic antibiotic treatment in cystic fibrosis patients with chronic Pseudomonas infection of the lungs.
We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled clinical trial to prospectively assess whether use of combination antibiotic susceptibility testing improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis who were infected with multiresistant bacteria.
                251 patients with cystic fibrosis who were chronically infected with multiresistant gram negative bacteria gave sputum at 3-month intervals for conventional culture and sensitivity tests and for combination antibiotic susceptibility tests using multiple combination bactericidal antibiotic testing (MCBT). Patients who developed an exacerbation of pulmonary disease were randomised to receive a 14-day course of any two blinded intravenous antibiotics chosen on the basis of either results from conventional sputum culture and sensitivity testing or the result of MCBT. The primary outcome was time from randomisation until the patient's next pulmonary exacerbation. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN60187870.
                132 patients had a pulmonary exacerbation and were randomised during the 4.5-year study period. The time to next pulmonary exacerbation was not prolonged in the MCBT-treated group (hazard ratio 0.86 in favour of the conventionally-treated group, 95% CI 0.60-1.23, p=0.40). There was no difference between the groups in treatment failure rate. After 14 days of intravenous antibiotic therapy, changes in lung function, dyspnoea, and sputum bacterial density were similar in both groups.
                Antibiotic therapy directed by combination antibiotic susceptibility testing did not result in better clinical and bacteriological outcomes compared with therapy directed by standard culture and sensitivity techniques. The non-bactericidal effects of antibiotic therapy might play an important part in determining improvement in patients with cystic fibrosis pulmonary exacerbations. A previous retrospective study suggested that a policy of regular anti-pseudomonal antibiotic treatment improved pulmonary function and increased survival in patients with cystic fibrosis chronically infected with Pseudomonas species. The results of a prospective multicentre study to compare the effects on pulmonary function and mortality of three monthly elective anti-pseudomonal antibiotic treatment with conventional symptomatic treatment are reported.
                Sixty patients with cystic fibrosis, chronically infected with P aeruginosa, were randomised to the two treatment arms (elective or symptomatic) and followed clinically at yearly reviews. The major end points were changes in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) and forced vital capacity (FVC). Survival was a secondary end point.
                Patients in the symptomatic group received a mean of three antibiotic treatments each year and those in the elective group received four antibiotic treatments during each year of the study. No significant differences in FEV(1) and FVC were found between the two groups after three years. There was a statistically non-significant higher rate of deaths in the elective group (n = 4), three of which were associated with B cepacia infection, compared with the symptomatic group (n = 0).
                This study did not demonstrate an advantage of a policy of elective antibiotic treatment over symptomatic treatment in patients with cystic fibrosis chronically infected with Pseudomonas species.
Studies are insufficient to identify conclusive evidence favouring a policy of elective intravenous antibiotic administration, despite its widespread use, neither are the potential risks adequately evaluated. The results should be viewed with caution, as participant numbers are small. Clearly there is a need for a well-designed, adequately-powered, multicentred randomised controlled trial to evaluate these issues.
This review will no longer be regularly updated. Searches will still be undertaken on a two-yearly basis by the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis & Genetic Disorders Group. If, in future, relevant trials are identified, the review will be updated again.