ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2009
The rationale for the new infective endocarditis guidelines.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures to prevent infective endocarditis: a systematic review.Infection · 2023Pooled it
- Brain abscess and periodontal pathogens (Clinical case reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given the terrible consequences of infectious endocarditis (IE), it has become a time-honored strategy to use antibiotics as prophylaxis against IE for invasive procedures associated with bacteremia with endocarditis-causing organisms. The evidence supporting this approach has come predominantly from animal models of endocarditis or observational human studies. Prompted by the desire to realistically assess the evidence base for a health policy with global implications and against the backdrop of increasing microbial resistance to antibiotics, a careful review of all available data regarding the effectiveness of prophylaxis against IE was performed. This reanalysis prompted a new set of recommendations for IE prevention, published in 2007 by the American Heart Association, which represented a marked divergence from 50 years of prior publications. The rationale and underpinning evidence for the new recommendations are reviewed here, with an eye to the gaps in the available evidence and the need for future research.
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.