Trial reportJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2006
Efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections requiring surgical intervention.
Trial report in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy and safety of eravacycline compared with current clinically common antibiotics in the treatment of adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of complicated infections: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC infectious diseases · 2009Pooled it
- Carbapenems versus other beta-lactams in treating severe infections in intensive care: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2008Pooled it
- Trial
- A prospective, double-blind, multicenter, randomized trial comparing ertapenem 3 vs >or=5 days in community-acquired intraabdominal infection.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2008Trial
- Gram-negative bacterial infection randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the 21st century: characteristics and evolution.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Review
- Response to LTE on Prophylactic Antibiotic Duration.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023Article
- Carbapenems vs β-Lactam Monotherapy or Combination Therapy for the Treatment of Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Open forum infectious diseases · 2019Article
- The Role of Ertapenem for the Treatment of Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections With a Positive Culture forOpen forum infectious diseases · 2019Article
- The common prophylactic therapy for bowel surgery is ineffective for clearing Bacteroidetes, the primary inducers of systemic inflammation, and causes faster death in response to intestinal barrier damage in mice.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complicated intra-abdominal infections usually mandate prompt surgical intervention supplemented by appropriate antimicrobial therapy. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that ertapenem was not inferior to piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of community-acquired intra-abdominal infections. A randomized open-label active-comparator clinical trial was conducted at 48 medical centers on four continents from December 2001 to February 2003. Adult patients with intra-abdominal infections requiring surgery were randomized to receive either ertapenem 1 g daily or piperacillin/tazobactam 13.5 g daily in 3-4 divided doses. The primary analysis of efficacy was the clinical response rate in clinically and microbiologically evaluable patients at the test-of-cure assessment 2 weeks after completion of therapy. All treated patients were included in the safety analysis. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment duration in both treatment groups were generally similar. The most commonly isolated pathogens at baseline were E coli (greater than 50% of cases in each group) and B fragilis ( approximately 9%). Favorable clinical response rates were 107/119 (90%) for ertapenem recipients and 107/114 (94%) for piperacillin/tazobactam recipients. The frequencies of drug-related adverse events, most commonly diarrhea and elevated serum alanine aminotransferase levels, were similar in both treatment groups. Six of 180 ertapenem recipients (3%) and two of 190 piperacillin/tazobactam recipients (1%) had serious drug-related adverse experiences. In this study, ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam were comparably safe and effective treatments for adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections.
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.