Rescue Therapies for Infection in Italy.

: Curing infection remains challenging for clinicians, as no proposed first-line therapy achieves bacterial eradication in all treated patients so that several patients need two or more consecutive treatments. Bacterial culture with antibiotics susceptibility testing is largely unachievable in Italy, and empiric second-line and rescue therapies are generally used. This study aimed to identify what eradication regimens perform better in Italy, following first-line therapy failure. We performed a literature search on PubMed for studies on standard therapy regimens used as second-line or rescue treatments performed in adult patients. Studies including modified drug combinations were not considered. Both intention-to-treat and per- protocol analyses were computed for each therapy subgroup. Data from 35 studies with a total of 4830 patients were eventually considered. As a second-line therapy, Pylera (90.6%) and a sequential regimen (89.8%) achieved eradication rates significantly higher than other therapies. For third-line therapy, a levofloxacin-based regimen and Pylera achieved comparable eradication rates (88.2% vs. 84.7%; = 0.2). Among therapies used as fourth (or more) attempts, Pylera and a rifabutin-based therapy achieved 77.4% and 66.4% cure rates, respectively ( = 0.013). A therapy sequence based on the type of first-line therapy used was proposed. Data obtained through our review indicate that standard therapies for eradication can be used when following an appropriate sequence, allowing clinicians to improve the cure rate without resorting to bacterial culture.