SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Antibiotics for treating human brucellosis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 8 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
58 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 141 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research mapping and comparative assessment of drug treatment regimens for brucellosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis on Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns of the Two MajorTransboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Updated therapeutic options for human brucellosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of therapeutic strategies for human brucellosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Quantifying research hotspots and trends in brucella spondylitis: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Better efficacy of triple antibiotics therapy for human brucellosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Occupational exposure to Brucella spp.: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Rifampicin versus streptomycin for brucellosis treatment in humans: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Brucellosis Surveillance - United States, 2010-2024.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2026Article
- A LASSO-Based Nomogram for Predicting Focal Complications in Brucellosis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Cervical brucellar spondylitis: Current management strategies and future directions.Infectious medicine · 2026Review
- A review on phytochemical and bacteriophage based therapeutic strategies for the management of Brucellosis.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in treating acute myelopathy caused byAnnals of medicine · 2025Article
- Seroprevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Human Brucellosis in a Farming and Animal Health Community in South Africa, 2015-2016.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- SIRT2 inhibition enhances mitochondrial apoptosis in Brucella-infected bovine placental trophoblast cells.Veterinary research · 2025Article
- Necrotizing pancreatitis associated with acute brucellosis: A rare clinical observation.IDCases · 2025Article
- Epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory characteristics of 581 human brucellosis cases in Xinjiang, China.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrucellosis is the most common zoonotic infection in the world. Several antibiotics, separately or in combination, have been tried for treatment of human brucellosis. The inconsistencies between different treatment regimens warrants the need for a systematic review to inform clinical practice and future research.
objectivesTo evaluate the effects of various antibiotic regimens, monotherapy or in combination with other antibiotics, for treating human brucellosis. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS until May 2012. We browsed the abstract books of several international infectious diseases conferences. We also checked the reference lists of all studies identified SELECTION CRITERIA: We included the randomized controlled trials on the pharmaceutical interventions in treatment of acute, chronic, non-complicated, and complicated human brucellosis. The outcomes of interest were relapse, persistence of symptoms at the end of treatment, and adverse drug effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, risk of bias, and extracted relevant data using pre-designed extraction forms. The findings of homogenous studies were pooled using fixed-effect meta-analysis. MAIN
resultsIn total we included 25 studies comparing various antibiotic regimens. Methods of allocation and concealment were inadequately described in half the studies, and only three were blinded. In comparisons of doxycycline plus rifampicin versus doxycycline plus streptomycin we found eight studies with 694 participants. For treatment failure, the doxycycline plus rifampicin regimen was less effective (risk ratio (RR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 3.42, seven studies, 567 participants), relapse (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.86), and minor adverse drug reactions (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.92). In comparisons of doxycycline plus rifampicin against quinolone (ciprofloxacin or ofloxacin) plus rifampicin we found five studies of 336 participants. The pooled analysis did not demonstrate any significant difference between two regimens in terms of relapse and symptom persistence, but showed a non-significant higher risk of minor adverse reactions in doxycycline plus rifampicin (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.78 to 4.18). Other comparisons were reported in a few heterogenous studies, and the pooled analyses, where applied, did not show any significant difference. AUTHORS'
conclusionsDoxycycline (six weeks) plus streptomycin (two or three weeks) regimen is more effective regimen than doxycycline plus rifampicin (six weeks) regimen. Since it needs daily intramuscular (IM) injection, access to care and cost are important factors in deciding between two choices. Quinolone plus rifampicin (six weeks) regimen is slightly better tolerated than doxycycline plus rifampicin, and low quality evidence did not show any difference in overall effectiveness.
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.