Scholarlink

Background <p>Antimicrobial resistance represents a major global health concern, particularly with the rise of carbapenem-resistant pathogens that significantly constrain therapeutic options. Imipenem–cilastatin–relebactam (IMI-REL), a novel combination of a β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor, has emerged as a promising treatment for patients with few alternatives. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IMI-REL in comparison with standard-of-care antibiotics for managing resistant or complicated bacterial infections.</p> Methods <p>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed following PRISMA guidelines. Comprehensive searches of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were conducted up to July 2025. Eligible studies included RCTs comparing IMI-REL with alternative antibiotics in patients with resistant or complicated infections, reporting clinical and/or microbiological outcomes. The primary outcomes were clinical and microbiological responses assessed at the end of intravenous therapy (DCIV), early follow-up (EFU), and late follow-up (LFU). Secondary outcomes comprised adverse events, serious adverse events (SAEs), treatment discontinuation due to adverse events, and all-cause mortality.</p> Results <p>Six randomized controlled trials were included, encompassing different types of infections caused by imipenem-resistant pathogens. Across these studies, IMI-REL demonstrated comparable clinical responses to standard-of-care regimens at the end of intravenous therapy (DCIV) (RR: 1.04; 95% CI 0.94–1.16), early follow-up (EFU) (RR: 1.02; 95% CI 0.92–1.12), and late follow-up (LFU) (RR: 1.01; 95% CI 0.91–1.12). Microbiological outcomes were similarly equivalent between treatment groups. Safety analyses indicated no increased risk of adverse events (RR: 1.01; 95% CI 0.77–1.32), serious adverse events (SAEs) (RR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.70–1.23), discontinuation due to adverse events (RR: 0.62; 95% CI 0.39–1.01), or mortality (RR: 0.83; 95% CI 0.41–1.67).</p> Conclusion <p>IMI-REL demonstrates efficacy and safety comparable to standard-of-care treatments for resistant and complicated infections. It may serve as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with limited alternatives and can support antimicrobial stewardship when administered as a short-course empirical therapy followed by appropriate de-escalation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Efficacy and safety of imipenem–cilastatin–relebactam in resistant infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月21日

查看全文
  • Nahed Hawsawi

摘要

Background

Antimicrobial resistance represents a major global health concern, particularly with the rise of carbapenem-resistant pathogens that significantly constrain therapeutic options. Imipenem–cilastatin–relebactam (IMI-REL), a novel combination of a β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor, has emerged as a promising treatment for patients with few alternatives. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IMI-REL in comparison with standard-of-care antibiotics for managing resistant or complicated bacterial infections.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed following PRISMA guidelines. Comprehensive searches of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were conducted up to July 2025. Eligible studies included RCTs comparing IMI-REL with alternative antibiotics in patients with resistant or complicated infections, reporting clinical and/or microbiological outcomes. The primary outcomes were clinical and microbiological responses assessed at the end of intravenous therapy (DCIV), early follow-up (EFU), and late follow-up (LFU). Secondary outcomes comprised adverse events, serious adverse events (SAEs), treatment discontinuation due to adverse events, and all-cause mortality.

Results

Six randomized controlled trials were included, encompassing different types of infections caused by imipenem-resistant pathogens. Across these studies, IMI-REL demonstrated comparable clinical responses to standard-of-care regimens at the end of intravenous therapy (DCIV) (RR: 1.04; 95% CI 0.94–1.16), early follow-up (EFU) (RR: 1.02; 95% CI 0.92–1.12), and late follow-up (LFU) (RR: 1.01; 95% CI 0.91–1.12). Microbiological outcomes were similarly equivalent between treatment groups. Safety analyses indicated no increased risk of adverse events (RR: 1.01; 95% CI 0.77–1.32), serious adverse events (SAEs) (RR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.70–1.23), discontinuation due to adverse events (RR: 0.62; 95% CI 0.39–1.01), or mortality (RR: 0.83; 95% CI 0.41–1.67).

Conclusion

IMI-REL demonstrates efficacy and safety comparable to standard-of-care treatments for resistant and complicated infections. It may serve as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with limited alternatives and can support antimicrobial stewardship when administered as a short-course empirical therapy followed by appropriate de-escalation.