Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19117135›Full record

ReviewThe AAPS journal2009

Protein binding of antimicrobials: methods for quantification and for investigation of its impact on bacterial killing.

Jürgen Beer, Claudia Christina Wagner, Markus Zeitlinger

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The AAPS journal, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Pharmacokinetic Characteristics of Florfenicol in Freshwater Crocodiles (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jürgen BeerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Claudia Christina Wagner
Markus Zeitlinger
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plasma protein binding of antimicrobial agents is considered to be a key characteristic of antibiotics as it affects both their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. However, up to the present, no standard methods for measuring protein binding or for quantification of the influence of protein binding on antimicrobial activity exist. This short-coming has previously led to conflicting results on antibacterial activity of highly protein-bound antibiotics. The present review, therefore, set out to summarize (1) methods for quantification of protein binding, (2) microbiological growth media used for determination of the impact of protein binding on antimicrobial activity of antibiotics, and (3) different pharmacodynamic in vitro studies that are used in this context. The advantages and disadvantages of a wide range of different approaches are discussed and compared. The urgent call for international standardization by microbiological societies and laboratories may be considered as a logical consequence of the presented data.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaBlood ProteinsBody FluidsChemistry Techniques, AnalyticalCulture MediaDrug Resistance, MicrobialHumansMetabolic Clearance RateMicrobial Sensitivity TestsProtein BindingTime FactorsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBlood ProteinsCulture Media

Identifiers

PMID19117135
PMCPMC2664873
OpenAlexW2062408808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.