Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24080646›Full record

ReviewAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2014

Antibiotic treatment of infections due to carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: systematic evaluation of the available evidence.

Matthew E Falagas, Panagiota Lourida, Panagiotis Poulikakos, Petros I Rafailidis, Giannoula S Tansarli

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04202861 (A Randomised Controlled Trial Evaluating a Novel Individualised Treatment Strategy for Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria Infections), which is not on this map. Cited by 134 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
134citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04202861 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Randomised Controlled Trial Evaluating a Novel Individualised Treatment Strategy for Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria Infections (iACT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSingapore General HospitalRan2019 to 2023Enrolled594ConditionsAntibiotic TherapyArmsIn vitro antibiotic combination testing (iACT)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

134 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020
    Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Combination antibiotic treatment versus monotherapy for multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant, and pandrug-resistant Acinetobacter infections: a systematic review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. World journal of hepatology · 2024
    Article
  16. Detection of blaBMC microbiology · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

74 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matthew E FalagasAlfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences (AIBS), Marousi, Athens, Greece.
Panagiota Lourida
Panagiotis Poulikakos
Petros I Rafailidis
Giannoula S Tansarli

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of the antibiotic treatment administered for infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. The PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched. Articles reporting the clinical outcomes of patients infected with carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae according to the antibiotic treatment administered were eligible. Twenty nonrandomized studies comprising 692 patients who received definitive treatment were included. Almost all studies reported on Klebsiella spp. In 8 studies, the majority of infections were bacteremia, while pneumonia and urinary tract infections were the most common infections in 12 studies. In 10 studies, the majority of patients were critically ill. There are methodological issues, including clinical heterogeneity, that preclude the synthesis of the available evidence using statistical analyses, including meta-analysis. From the descriptive point of view, among patients who received combination treatment, mortality was up to 50% for the tigecycline-gentamicin combination, up to 64% for tigecycline-colistin, and up to 67% for carbapenem-colistin. Among the monotherapy-treated patients, mortality was up to 57% for colistin and up to 80% for tigecycline. Certain regimens were administered to a small number of patients in certain studies. Three studies reporting on 194 critically ill patients with bacteremia showed individually significantly lower mortality in the combination arm than in the monotherapy arm. In the other studies, no significant difference in mortality was recorded between the compared groups. Combination antibiotic treatment may be considered the optimal option for severely ill patients with severe infections. However, well-designed randomized studies of specific patient populations are needed to further clarify this issue.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteremiabeta-Lactam ResistanceCarbapenemsColistinCritical IllnessDrug Therapy, CombinationEnterobacteriaceaeHumansMinocyclinePneumonia, BacterialSurvival AnalysisTigecyclineUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsColistinMinocyclineTigecycline

Identifiers

PMID24080646
PMCPMC3910850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.