Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16569261›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2006

Combination therapy versus monotherapy: a randomised pilot study on the evolution of inflammatory parameters after ventilator associated pneumonia [ISRCTN31976779].

Pierre Damas, Christophe Garweg, Mehran Monchi, Monique Nys, Jean-Luc Canivet, Didier Ledoux, Jean-Charles Preiser

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antibiotics for ventilator-associated pneumonia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pierre DamasDepartment of General Intensive Care, University Hospital Centre, Domaine universitaire du Sart-Tilman, B-4000 Liege, Belgium. pdamas@chu.ulg.ac.be
Christophe Garweg
Mehran Monchi
Monique Nys
Jean-Luc Canivet
Didier Ledoux
Jean-Charles Preiser
University of Liège · BECentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCombination antibiotic therapy for ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) is often used to broaden the spectrum of activity of empirical treatment. The relevance of such synergy is commonly supposed but poorly supported. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcome and the course of biological variables in patients treated for a VAP, using a monotherapy with a beta-lactam versus a combination therapy.

methodsPatients with VAP were prospectively randomised to receive either cefepime alone or cefepime in association with amikacin or levofloxacin. Clinical and inflammatory parameters were measured on the day of inclusion and thereafter.

resultsSeventy-four mechanically ventilated patients meeting clinical criteria for VAP were enrolled in the study. VAP was microbiologically confirmed in 59 patients (84%). Patients were randomised to receive cefepime (C group, 20 patients), cefepime with amikacin (C-A group, 19 patients) or cefepime with levofloxacin (C-L group, 20 patients). No significant difference was observed regarding the time course of temperature, leukocytosis or C-reactive protein level. There were no differences between length of stay in the intensive care unit after infection, nor in ventilator free days within 28 days after infection. No difference in mortality was observed.

conclusionAntibiotic combination using a fourth generation cephalosporin with either an aminoside or a fluoroquinolone is not associated with a clinical or biological benefit when compared to cephalosporin monotherapy against common susceptible pathogens causing VAP.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsCross InfectionDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsPneumoniaProspective StudiesProtein CRespiration, ArtificialVentilators, MechanicalAnti-Bacterial AgentsProtein C

Identifiers

PMID16569261
PMCPMC1550875
OpenAlexW2110488437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.