ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2014
Ceftobiprole medocaril is an effective treatment against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) mediastinitis in a rat model.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A phase 3 randomized double-blind comparison of ceftobiprole medocaril versus ceftazidime plus linezolid for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2014Trial
- [Rational antibiotic treatment of mediastinitis].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016Review
- Adjunctive Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy or Alone Antibiotherapy? Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Mediastinitis in a Rat Model.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgeryArticle
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
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) mediastinitis after median sternotomy is a major complication of cardiac surgery with significant morbidity and mortality rates. We evaluated the efficacy of ceftobiprole medocaril in a new rat model of mediastinitis and compared it to vancomycin. The model was induced in 92 rats. Infection was induced immediately after median sternotomy by the injection of MRSA (strain 3020, 1 × 10(7) cfu/rat) into the sternal bone. After 24 h, rats (groups of 6-8) were treated intraperitoneally for 5 days or 14 days by either: (i) saline (control, q8h), (ii) ceftobiprole medocaril (70 or 100 mg/kg, q8h), or (iii) vancomycin (50 mg/kg, q12h). Efficacy was determined by a reduction in bacterial cfu in the sternum and spleen tissues. Comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney test. A 5-day treatment course of ceftobiprole at both doses tested lead to a significant reduction in MRSA load in the sternum (p < 0.01) as compared to the control group and compared to 5-day vancomycin treatment, which lead to a non-significant reduction (p = 0.07). Longer treatment (14 days) with ceftobiprole lead to a complete clearance of MRSA from the sternum, similarly to vancomycin. Ceftobiprole also showed a significant effect on eliminating MRSA dissemination to the spleen compared to saline-treated rats. Ceftobiprole was effective in treating MRSA mediastinitis in the rat model. In the 5-day course, ceftobiprole showed a significant reduction in sternal MRSA counts and was superior to vancomycin. After 14 days, both ceftobiprole and vancomycin showed clearance of MRSA from the sternum in more than 50 % of rats and almost complete clearance in the remainder.
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.