SynthesisAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2009
Comparative efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04176328 (An Open-label, Dose-escalation Study to Evaluate the Pharmacokinetics of Inhaled Teicoplanin in Cystic Fibrosis Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 98 papers, 6 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.
An Open-label, Dose-escalation Study to Evaluate the Pharmacokinetics of Inhaled Teicoplanin in Cystic Fibrosis Patients
Who cites it
98 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 276 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Optimal Use and Need for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Teicoplanin in Children: A Systematic Review.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical practice guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring of teicoplanin: a consensus review by the Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and the Japanese Society of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2022Guideline
- Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of vancomycin for the treatment of patients with gram-positive infections: focus on the study design.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2012Pooled it
- Evidence-based guidelines for empirical therapy of neutropenic fever in Korea.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2011Guideline
- Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of teicoplanin in neonates: making better use of C-reactive protein to deliver individualized therapy.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2016Trial
- Tolerability and Plasma Drug Level Monitoring of Prolonged Subcutaneous Teicoplanin Treatment for Bone and Joint Infections.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2016Trial
- Population pharmacokinetics and dosing optimization of teicoplanin in children with malignant haematological disease.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Trial
- Clinical outcomes of teicoplanin for Corynebacterium species bacteremia: A retrospective observational study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Teicoplanin Versus Standard of Care Antibiotics for the Treatment of Gram-Positive Bacteremia: A Seven-Year Retrospective Analysis.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- A Real-World Pharmacovigilance Analysis of the Safety Profiles Associated with Anti-MRSA Agents Using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) Database.Infectious disease reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of teicoplanin protein-binding variability and clinical utility of its free serum concentration measurement.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Soaking in Povidone-Iodine, Chlorhexidine, Teicoplanin, Vancomycin, and Saline Solution Differentially Alters Porcine Flexor Tendon Size and Biomechanical Properties.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Population pharmacokinetics and dosing optimization of teicoplanin in renal transplant patients.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Evaluating anti-MRSA antibiotic stewardship with a focus on trends in consumption and resistance in a tertiary hospital in Alexandria, Egypt from 2019 to 2023.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- The CssRS two-component system of Bacillus subtilis contributes to teicoplanin and polymyxin B response.Folia microbiologica · 2025Article
- Epidemiology and Outcomes of Infected Non-Unions: An Observational Study at an Infectious Disease Referral Centre.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Early Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Optimizes Teicoplanin Use in Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Hematological Malignancies.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Personalized application of antimicrobial drugs in pediatric patients with augmented renal clearance: a review of literature.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Review
38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
Vancomycin and teicoplanin are the glycopeptides currently in use for the treatment of infections caused by invasive beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive organisms. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that have compared vancomycin and teicoplanin administered systemically for the treatment of suspected or proven infections. A comprehensive search of trials without year, language, or publication status restrictions was performed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by using the fixed-effect model (RRs of >1 favor vancomycin). Twenty-four trials were included. All-cause mortality was similar overall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.21), and there was no significant heterogeneity. In trials that used adequate allocation concealment, the results favored teicoplanin (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.06), while in trials with unknown methods or inadequate concealment, the results favored vancomycin (RR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.27 to 10.30). The latter trials might have recruited more severely ill patients. No other variable affected the RRs for mortality, including the assessment of glycopeptides administered empirically or for proven infections, neutropenia, the participant's age, and drug dosing. There were no significant differences between teicoplanin and vancomycin with regard to clinical failure (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.05), microbiological failure (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.65), and other efficacy outcomes. Lower RRs (in favor of teicoplanin) for clinical failure were observed with a lower risk of bias and when treatment was initiated for infections caused by gram-positive organisms rather than empirically. Total adverse events (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74), nephrotoxicity (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.61), and red man syndrome were significantly less frequent with teicoplanin. Teicoplanin is not inferior to vancomycin with regard to efficacy and is associated with a lower adverse event rate than vancomycin.
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.