Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15846719›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Antibiotic regimens for secondary peritonitis of gastrointestinal origin in adults.

P F Wong, A D Gilliam, S Kumar, J Shenfine, G N O'Dair, D J Leaper

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03334006 (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Personalized Medicine With Pentaglobin® After Surgical Infectious Source Control in Patients With Peritonitis), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03334006 phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Prospective, Randomized Trial of Personalized Medicine With Pentaglobin® After Surgical Infectious Source Control in Patients With Peritonitis

TypeinterventionalSponsorRWTH Aachen UniversityRan2017 to 2028Enrolled200ConditionsPeritonitis, Sepsis, Septic ShockArmsPentaglobin®/Standard of Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ESTES guidelines: acute mesenteric ischaemia.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2016
    Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Initial microbial spectrum in severe secondary peritonitis and relevance for treatment.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012
    Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Intestinal thromboangiitis obliterans: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2021
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review Article: Mesenteric Ischemia.Current gastroenterology reports · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Surgical treatment of secondary peritonitis : A continuing problem.Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2017
    Article
  19. [Surgical treatment of secondary peritonitis: A continuing problem. German version].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016
    Review
  20. [Antibiotic therapy of intra-abdominal infections in the era of multiresistance].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

P F WongProfessorial Unit of Surgery, University Hospital of North Tees, Hardwick, Stockton on Tees, UK, TS19 8PE. pwong@doctors.net.uk
A D Gilliam
S Kumar
J Shenfine
G N O'Dair
D J Leaper
University Hospital of North Tees · GBCardiff University · GBFreeman Hospital · GBQueen's Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSecondary peritonitis is associated with a high mortality rate and if not treated successfully leads to development of abscesses, severe sepsis and multi-organ failure. Source control and adjunctive antibiotics are the mainstay of treatment. However, no conclusive evidence suggest that one antibiotic regimen is better than any other but at the same time have a lower toxicity.

objectivesTo ascertain the efficacy and adverse effects of different antibiotic regimens in treating intra-abdominal infections in adults. Outcomes were divided into primary (clinical success and effectiveness in reducing mortality) and secondary (microbiological success, preventing wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, clinical sepsis, remote infection, superinfection, adverse reactions, duration of treatment required, effectiveness in reducing hospitalised stay, and time to defervescence). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (from 1966 to November 2004), EMBASE (from 1980 to November 2004) and Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group specialised register SR-COLOCA. Bibliographies of identified studies were screened for further relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different antibiotic regimens in the treatment of secondary peritonitis in adults were selected. Trials reporting gynaecological or traumatic peritonitis were excluded from this review. Ambiguity regarding suitability of trials were discussed among the review team. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Six reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data collection was standardised using data collection form to ensure uniformity among reviewers. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes, or weight mean difference for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals. MAIN

resultsFourty studies with 5094 patients met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen different comparative antibiotic regimens were reported. All antibiotics showed equivocal comparability in terms of clinical success. Mortality did not differ between the regimens. Despite the potential high toxicity profile of regimens using aminoglycosides, this was not demonstrated in this review. The reason for this could be the inherent bias within clinical trials in the form of patient selection and stringency in monitoring drug levels. AUTHORS'

conclusionsNo specific recommendations can be made for the first line treatment of secondary peritonitis in adults with antibiotics, as all regimens showed equivocal efficacy. Other factors such as local guidelines and preferences, ease of administration, costs and availability must therefore be taken into consideration in deciding the antibiotic regimen of choice. Future trials should attempt to stratify patients and perform intention-to-treat analysis to allow better external validity.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsHumansIntestinal PerforationPeritonitisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID15846719
PMCPMC11297476
OpenAlexW2127623168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.