ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2012
Vancomycin versus linezolid in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus meningitis in an experimental rabbit model.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2012. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proper use of antibiotics: situation of linezolid at the intensive care unit of the Tunisian Military Hospital.The Pan African medical journal · 2016Article
- Efficacy of linezolid, teicoplanin, and vancomycin in prevention of an experimental polytetrafluoroethylene graft infection model caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the antibacterial efficacy of vancomycin and linezolid in a rabbit model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) meningitis. MATERIAL/
methodsMeningitis was induced by intracisternal inoculation of ATCC 43300 strain. After 16 h incubation time and development of meningitis, the vancomycin group received vancomycin 20 mg/kg every 12 h. The linezolid-10 and linezolid-20 groups received linezolid in 10 and 20 mg/kg dosages every 12 h, respectively. The control group did not receive any antibiotics. Cerebrospinal fluid bacterial counts were measured at the end of 16-h incubation time and at the end of 24-h treatment.
resultsBacterial counts were similar in all groups at 16 h. At the end of treatment the decrease in bacterial counts in the vancomycin group was approximately 2 logs higher than the linezolid-20 group (p>0.05) and approximately 4 logs higher than in the linezolid-10 group (p: 0.037) (Vancomycin group: -2.860 ± 4.495 versus Linezolid-20: -0.724 ± 4.360, versus Linezolid-10: 1.39 ± 3.37). Full or partial bacteriological response was higher in vancomycin versus linezolid-10 (p: 0.01), but not vancomycin versus linezolid-20 or linezolid-10 versus-linezolid-20 groups.
conclusionsOur results suggest that linezolid is not statistically inferior to vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA meningitis in an experimental rabbit model in 20 mg/kg q12 h dosage; however, it is inferior in 10 mg/kg q12 h dosage. Additional data should gathered to confirm these findings in advance of clinical trials to assess efficacy in humans.
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.