ArticleThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses1997
Study of the comparative activity of piperacillin/tazobactam with currently available antibiotics against 8206 aerobic isolates.
Article in The Canadian journal of infectious diseases = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Description and validation of a spectrum score method to measure antimicrobial de-escalation in healthcare associated pneumonia from electronic medical records data.BMC infectious diseases · 2015Article
- Cross-Canada survey of resistance of 2747 aerobic blood culture isolates to piperacillin/tazobactam and other antibiotics.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses · 1998Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the activity of piperacillin-tazobactam with piperacillin and other parenterally administered antibiotics against aerobic Gram-negative bacilli and Gram-positive cocci isolated from across Canada, and to determine the prevalence of resistance mediated by extended-spectrum cephalosporinases.
methodsSixty-one laboratories participated. Disk diffusion testing was performed in accordance with methods outlined by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Susceptibilities were performed on 8206 strains. Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae with reduced susceptibilities to third-generation cephalosporins were screened for extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs).
resultsPiperacillin-tazobactam was active against 92% of the strains, piperacillin against 81% and ticarcillin-clavulanic acid against 88%. Few differences were observed in the relative susceptibility of strains from teaching or community hospitals, from different anatomic sites or from different regions of the country. Aerobic Gram-negative bacilli tested tended to be more susceptible to all the agents than was recently reported in a similar American study. Only 43% of Enterococcus faecium were susceptible to ampicillin and 42% to piperacillin piperacillin with and without tazobactam. Only two enterococcal strains were resistant to vancomycin, and 19 had intermediate zone sizes. Of the 10 strains of E coli and eight strains of K pneumoniae with reduced susceptibility to extended spectrum cephalosporins, only one demonstrated typical ESBL activity.
conclusionsCanadian aerobic Gram-positive cocci and Gram-negative bacilli remain highly susceptible to many currently available antibiotics. The findings confirm a broad spectrum of activity of piperacillin-tazobactam and indicate that the pattern of susceptibility is quite uniform from different body sites, in both teaching and community hospitals, and across the country.
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.