Trial reportScandinavian journal of primary health care2009
Pivmecillinam versus sulfamethizole for short-term treatment of uncomplicated acute cystitis in general practice: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncomplicated Bacterial Community-Acquired Urinary Tract Infection in Adults.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Guideline
- The efficacy of pivmecillinam: 3 days or 5 days t.i.d against community acquired uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections - a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial study protocol.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Trial
- Article
- The efficacy of pivmecillinam in oral step-down treatment in hospitalised patients with E. coli bacteremic urinary tract infection; a single-arm, uncontrolled treatment study.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- A systematic review of the outcomes reported in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection clinical trials.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2022Review
- Article
- Three versus five days of pivmecillinam for community-acquired uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled superiority trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2019Article
- Pivmecillinam for Uncomplicated Lower Urinary Tract Infections Caused byAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Prescription of antibiotics for urinary tract infection in general practice in Denmark.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Mecillinam for the treatment of acute pyelonephritis and bacteremia caused by Enterobacteriaceae: a literature review.Infection and drug resistance · 2018Review
- Article
- Urinary tract infections in women: etiology and treatment options.International journal of general medicine · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate whether short-term treatment with pivmecillinam was more effective than sulfamethizole in patients with acute uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI).
designRandomized controlled trial.
settingGeneral practice, Denmark. SUBJECTS: Patients (n = 167) with uncomplicated UTI confirmed by positive urine phase-contrast microscopy.
main outcome measuresDrug efficacy based on clinical and bacteriological cure.
resultsUrinary symptoms disappeared first in patients treated with pivmecillinam, but after five days there was no significant difference in clinical cure rate between the two antibiotics. At the follow-up visit 7-10 days after initiation of treatment, 95.4% of patients treated with pivmecillinam and 92.6% of patients treated with sulfamethizole had no persistent cystitis symptoms (difference 2.8%, CI -4.5%; 10.0%). Bacteriological cure was observed in 68.8% of patients randomized to pivmecillinam and in 77.9% randomized to sulfamethizole (difference -9.2%, CI -24.7%; 6.3%). Some 26.8% of patients randomized to pivmecillinam experienced a new UTI within 6 months after treatment compared with 18.4% of patients randomized to sulfamethizole (difference 8.4%, CI -4.5%;21.4%). No patients developed septicaemia with urinary pathogens within one year after initial treatment.
conclusionPatients treated with a three-day regime of pivmecillinam experienced faster relief of symptoms compared with patients treated with a three-day regime of sulfamethizole. Five days after initiation of treatment there was no significant difference in clinical and bacteriological cure between the two antibiotic regimes.
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.