Trial reportJournal of clinical microbiology2005
Microbiologic response to treatment of bacterial vaginosis with topical clindamycin or metronidazole.
Trial report in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03917134 (Efficacy of the Use of Metronidazole After Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Prevention of Vaginal Cellulitis or Vaginal Cuff Abscess. Multicentric Triple-blind Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Efficacy of the Use of Metronidazole After Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Prevention of Vaginal Cellulitis or Vaginal Cuff Abscess. Multicentric Triple-blind Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antiseptics and disinfectants for the treatment of bacterial vaginosis: a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2012Pooled it
- Combined oral contraceptive pill-exposure alone does not reduce the risk of bacterial vaginosis recurrence in a pilot randomised controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Supplementation of standard antibiotic therapy with oral probiotics for bacterial vaginosis and aerobic vaginitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.BMC women's health · 2015Trial
- Trial
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of bacterial vaginosis screening strategies in women attempting for natural conception.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Formulation, development and characterization of fosfomycin tromethamine pessaries for the treatment of vaginal infections.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Bacterial vaginosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
- Dual probiotic and antibiotic therapy targeting bacterial vaginosis: an integrated experimental/computational modeling perspective.Biomedical engineering advances · 2025Article
- A quinolone N-oxide antibiotic selectively targets Neisseria gonorrhoeae via its toxin-antitoxin system.Nature microbiology · 2025Article
- Molecular Exploration ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Antimicrobial resistance of genital mycoplasmas recovered from nonpregnant women in Greece: trends over the last 15 years.Future microbiology · 2024Article
- The Role ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Antibiotic-free vaginal microbiota transplant with donor engraftment, dysbiosis resolution and live birth after recurrent pregnancy loss: a proof of concept case study.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- An Inventory of South African Medicinal Plants Used in the Management of Sexually Transmitted and Related Opportunistic Infections: An Appraisal and Some Scientific Evidence (1990-2020).Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Astodrimer sodium and bacterial vaginosis: a mini review.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Review
- Preclinical Data on theAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2022Article
- The right bug in the right place: opportunities for bacterial vaginosis treatment.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2022Review
- Synergistic effects of carvacrol, α-terpinene, γ-terpinene, ρ-cymene and linalool against Gardnerella species.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the frequencies, concentrations, and antimicrobial susceptibilities of vaginal microbes isolated from women with bacterial vaginosis (BV) before and after therapy, 119 nonpregnant women aged 18 to 45 with clinical and Gram stain evidence of BV were randomized to receive intravaginal clindamycin or metronidazole. Vaginal swabs were collected at baseline and 7 to 12 days, 35 to 45 days, and 70 to 90 days following therapy for quantitative vaginal culture. For the 99 women completing all four visits, statistical analyses were performed comparing differences in vaginal microflora between the two treatment arms and between visits in the same treatment group. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing using the agar dilution method was performed for anaerobic gram-negative rods. Although both therapies resulted in decreased colonization by Gardnerella vaginalis and Mycoplasma hominis, only metronidazole treatment resulted in a significant decrease in the frequency and concentration of Prevotella bivia and black-pigmented Prevotella species. Of the 865 anaerobic gram-negative rods evaluated for susceptibility, only 3 (0.3%) were resistant to metronidazole, whereas clindamycin resistance increased significantly for P. bivia and black-pigmented anaerobic gram-negative rods persisting following clindamycin therapy. Clindamycin-resistant subpopulations of P. bivia and black-pigmented Prevotella species emerged 7 to 12 days after therapy even among women colonized initially by clindamycin-susceptible strains. These resistant subpopulations persisted at high frequencies (42 to 50%) 70 to 90 days following therapy. The two topical agents for treatment of BV have differing microbiologic effects on the vaginal microflora. The emergence of clindamycin-resistant anaerobic gram-negative rods following therapy is of concern.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.