Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20156911›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010

Prophylactic antibiotics for burns patients: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tomer Avni, Ariela Levcovich, Dean D Ad-El, Leonard Leibovici, Mical Paul

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06221761 (A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study on the Prophylactic Use of Antibiotics Within 72 Hours After Acute Burn Injury in Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 65 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT06221761 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study on the Prophylactic Use of Antibiotics Within 72 Hours After Acute Burn Injury in Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorRuijin HospitalRan2024 to 2025Enrolled240ConditionsBurn InfectionArmsnot using antibiotic, using antibiotic
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 201 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Antiseptics for burns.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing burn wound infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tomer AvniDepartment of Medicine E, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel.
Ariela Levcovich
Dean D Ad-El
Leonard Leibovici
Mical Paul
Rabin Medical Center · ILTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the evidence for prophylactic treatment with systemic antibiotics in burns patients.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials recruiting burns inpatients that compared antibiotic prophylaxis (systemic, non-absorbable, or topical) with placebo or no treatment. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Embase, conference proceedings, and bibliographies. No language, date, or publication status restrictions were imposed. Review methods Two reviewers independently extracted data. The primary outcome was all cause mortality. Risk or rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals were pooled with a fixed effect model if no heterogeneity was present.

results17 trials were included. Trials that assessed systemic antibiotic prophylaxis given for 4-14 days after admission showed a significant reduction in all cause mortality (risk ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.87, five trials). The corresponding number needed to treat was 8 (5 to 33), with a control event rate of 26%. Perioperative non-absorbable or topical antibiotics alone did not significantly affect mortality. There was a reduction in pneumonia with systemic prophylaxis and a reduction in wound infections with perioperative prophylaxis. Staphylococcus aureus infection or colonisation was reduced with anti-staphylococcal antibiotics. In three trials, resistance to the antibiotic used for prophylaxis significantly increased (rate ratio 2.84, 1.38 to 5.83). The overall methodological quality of the trials was poor.

conclusionsProphylaxis with systemic antibiotics has a beneficial effect in burns patients, but the methodological quality of the data is weak. As such prophylaxis is currently not recommended for patients with severe burns other than perioperatively, there is a need for randomised controlled trials to assess its use.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisBurnsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeWound InfectionAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID20156911
PMCPMC2822136
OpenAlexW2107656121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.