Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20186450›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2010

In vitro activity of tigecycline against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, including livestock-associated strains.

E J M Verkade, C J M M Verhulst, X W Huijsdens, J A J W Kluytmans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Tigecycline antibacterial activity, clinical effectiveness, and mechanisms and epidemiology of resistance: narrative review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

E J M VerkadeLaboratory for Microbiology and Infection Control, Amphia Hospital, PO Box 90158 4800 RK, Breda, The Netherlands. everkade@amphia.nl
C J M M Verhulst
X W Huijsdens
J A J W Kluytmans

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The in vitro activity of tigecycline was determined using a well-defined collection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates (n = 202), including 33 livestock-associated strains. Susceptibility testing was performed using the Etest system. Among the 202 MRSA strains, three (1.5%) had a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) value for tigecycline greater than 0.5 mg/l, which are considered to be resistant. When these strains were tested using Iso-Sensitest medium, the MICs were substantially lower and no resistance was found. This discrepancy warrants further investigations into the preferred test conditions for tigecycline. In conclusion, tigecycline showed good activity against MRSA strains in vitro.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansLinear ModelsMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMinocyclineStaphylococcal InfectionsTigecyclineAnti-Bacterial AgentsMinocyclineTigecycline

Identifiers

PMID20186450
PMCPMC2854363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.