Guidelines for the treatment of dysentery (shigellosis): a systematic review of the evidence.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Williams PCM, Berkley JA.
dc.date.accessioned 2024-07-31T08:41:29Z
dc.date.available 2024-07-31T08:41:29Z
dc.date.issued 2018-11
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1080/20469047.2017.1409454
dc.identifier.uri http://repository.kemri.go.ke:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/790
dc.description.abstract Background: Shigella remains the primary cause of diarrhoea in paediatric patients worldwide and accounts for up to 40,000 deaths per year. Current guidelines for the treatment of shigellosis are based on data which are over a decade old. In an era of increasing antimicrobial resistance, an updated review of the appropriate empirical therapy for shigellosis in children is necessary, taking into account susceptibility patterns, cost and the risk of adverse events. Methods: A systematic review of the current published literature on the treatment of shigella dysentery was undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Results: The initial search produced 131 results, of which nine studies met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the studies was assessed as per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. International guidelines were also reviewed. There is a lack of current research regarding the clinical treatment of shigellosis in paediatric and adult patients, despite rising antimicrobial resistance worldwide. In particular, there is a lack of studies assessing the non-susceptibility of community-acquired strains, with almost all published research pertaining to microbiological data from hospital-based settings. Discussion: Current WHO guidelines support the use of fluoroquinolones (first-line), β-lactams (second-line) and cephalosporins (second-line) which accords with currently available evidence and other international guidelines, and there is no strong evidence for changing this guidance. Azithromycin is appropriate as a second-line therapy in regions where the rate of non-susceptibility of ciprofloxacin is known to be high, and research suggests that, from a cardiac point of view, azithromycin is safer than other macrolide antibiotics. Cefixime is also a reasonable alternative, although its use must be weighed against the risk of dissemination of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing organisms. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Paediatrics and international child health. en_US
dc.subject Dysentery; antibiotics; antimicrobial resistance; shigella; shigellosis; treatment guidelines. en_US
dc.title Guidelines for the treatment of dysentery (shigellosis): a systematic review of the evidence. en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account