Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23158399›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2012

Antibiotic prescription patterns in the empiric therapy of severe sepsis: combination of antimicrobials with different mechanisms of action reduces mortality.

Ana Díaz-Martín, María Luisa Martínez-González, Ricard Ferrer, Carlos Ortiz-Leyba, Enrique Piacentini, Maria Jesus Lopez-Pueyo, Ignacio Martín-Loeches, Mitchell M Levy, Antoni Artigas, José Garnacho-Montero and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020
    Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A ComparativeIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2020
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) POSITION STATEMENT: Why IDSA Did Not Endorse the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2018
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Ana Díaz-Martín
María Luisa Martínez-González
Ricard Ferrer
Carlos Ortiz-Leyba
Enrique Piacentini
Maria Jesus Lopez-Pueyo
Ignacio Martín-Loeches
Mitchell M Levy
Antoni Artigas
José Garnacho-Montero
Edusepsis Study Group
Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversity Hospital Mútua de Terrassa · ESDeleted InstitutionHospital General Yagüe · ESInstituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla · ESRhode Island Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough early institution of adequate antimicrobial therapy is lifesaving in sepsis patients, optimal antimicrobial strategy has not been established. Moreover, the benefit of combination therapy over monotherapy remains to be determined. Our aims are to describe patterns of empiric antimicrobial therapy in severe sepsis, assessing the impact of combination therapy, including antimicrobials with different mechanisms of action, on mortality.

methodsThis is a Spanish national multicenter study, analyzing all patients admitted to ICUs who received antibiotics within the first 6 hours of diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. Antibiotic-prescription patterns in community-acquired infections and nosocomial infections were analyzed separately and compared. We compared the impact on mortality of empiric antibiotic treatment, including antibiotics with different mechanisms of action, termed different-class combination therapy (DCCT), with that of monotherapy and any other combination therapy possibilities (non-DCCT).

resultsWe included 1,372 patients, 1,022 (74.5%) of whom had community-acquired sepsis and 350 (25.5%) of whom had nosocomial sepsis. The most frequently prescribed antibiotic agents were β-lactams (902, 65.7%) and carbapenems (345, 25.1%). DCCT was administered to 388 patients (28.3%), whereas non-DCCT was administered to 984 (71.7%). The mortality rate was significantly lower in patients administered DCCTs than in those who were administered non-DCCTs (34% versus 40%; P = 0.042). The variables independently associated with mortality were age, male sex, APACHE II score, and community origin of the infection. DCCT was a protective factor against in-hospital mortality (odds ratio (OR), 0.699; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.522 to 0.936; P = 0.016), as was urologic focus of infection (OR, 0.241; 95% CI, 0.102 to 0.569; P = 0.001).

conclusionsβ-Lactams, including carbapenems, are the most frequently prescribed antibiotics in empiric therapy in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Administering a combination of antimicrobials with different mechanisms of action is associated with decreased mortality.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-LactamsCommunity-Acquired InfectionsCross InfectionDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedPractice Patterns, Physicians'SepsisShock, SepticSpainTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-Lactams

Identifiers

PMID23158399
PMCPMC3672602
OpenAlexW2108326341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.