SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010
De-escalation of antimicrobial treatment for adults with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020Guideline
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.Intensive care medicine · 2017Guideline
- High-volume haemofiltration for sepsis in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- De-escalation of antimicrobial treatment for adults with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- An agent-based model on antimicrobial de-escalation in intensive care units: Implications on clinical trial design.PloS one · 2024Article
- Type 1 interferon aggravates lipopolysaccharide-induced sepsis through upregulating Caspase-11 and Gasdermin D.Journal of physiology and biochemistry · 2021Article
- [Infections due to multidrug-resistant pathogens : Pathogens, resistance mechanisms and established treatment options].Der Anaesthesist · 2019Review
- Bacterial sepsis : Diagnostics and calculated antibiotic therapy.Der Anaesthesist · 2019Review
- [Bacterial sepsis : Diagnostics and calculated antibiotic therapy].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Review
- Prevalence and Antimicrobial Resistance of Microbes Causing Bloodstream Infections in Unguja, Zanzibar.PloS one · 2015Article
- Antibiotic stewardship in the intensive care unit.Critical care (London, England) · 2014Review
- The Japanese guidelines for the management of sepsis.Journal of intensive care · 2014Article
- Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients.Infection and drug resistance · 2014Review
- A survey on infection management practices in Italian ICUs.Critical care (London, England) · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMortality rates among patients with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock ranges from 27% to 54%. Empirical broad-spectrum antimicrobial treatment is aimed at achieving adequate antimicrobial therapy and thus reducing mortality. However, there is a risk that empirical broad-spectrum antimicrobial treatment can expose patients to overuse of antimicrobials. De-escalation has been proposed as a strategy to replace empirical broad-spectrum antimicrobial treatment with a narrower antimicrobial therapy. This is done by either changing the pharmacological agent or discontinuing a pharmacological combination according to the patient's microbial culture results.
objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of de-escalation antimicrobial treatment for adult patients diagnosed with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock caused by any micro-organism. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 8); MEDLINE via PubMed (from inception to August 2010); EMBASE (from inception to August 2010); LILACS (from inception to August 2010); Current Controlled Trials and bibliographic references of relevant studies. We also contacted the main authors in the area. We applied no language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomized controlled trials comparing de-escalation (based on culture results) versus standard therapy for adults with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. The primary outcome was mortality (at 28 days, hospital discharge or the end of the follow-up period). Studies including patients initially treated with an empirical but not adequate antimicrobial therapy were not considered for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors planned to independently select and extract data and evaluate methodological quality of all studies. We planned to use relative risk (risk ratio) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals. We planned to use the random-effects statistical model when the estimate effects of two or more studies could be combined in a meta-analysis. MAIN
resultsWe retrieved 436 references via the search strategy. No randomized controlled trials testing de-escalation antimicrobial treatment for adult patients diagnosed with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock could be included in this review. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is no adequate, direct evidence as to whether de-escalation of antimicrobial agents is effective and safe for adults with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. Therefore, it is not possible to either recommend or not recommend the de-escalation of antimicrobial agents in clinical practice for septic patients. This uncertainty warrants further research via randomized controlled trials or cohort studies.
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.