Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24624933›Full record

SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2014

Oral antibiotic therapy for the treatment of infective endocarditis: a systematic review.

Awad Al-Omari, D William Cameron, Craig Lee, Vicente F Corrales-Medina

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04544306 (Partial Oral Antimicrobial Versus Intravenous Antimicrobial Therapy to Treat Infective Endocarditis in People Who Inject Drugs), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT04544306 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Partial Oral Antimicrobial Versus Intravenous Antimicrobial Therapy to Treat Infective Endocarditis in People Who Inject Drugs

TypeinterventionalSponsorLondon Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sRan2021 to 2025Enrolled50ConditionsInfective EndocarditisArmsPartial oral antimicrobial therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Partial oral versus full intravenous antibiotic treatment of endocarditis in people who inject drugs: A systematic review.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Infective Endocarditis: Still More Challenges Than Convictions.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022
    Article
  11. Retrospective analysis of endocarditis patients to investigate the eligibility for oral antibiotic treatment in routine daily practice.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Awad Al-Omari
D William Cameron
Craig Lee
Vicente F Corrales-MedinaDepartment of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. vcorrales@toh.on.ca.
Ottawa Hospital · CAOttawa Hospital Research InstituteSecurity Forces Hospital · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe role of oral antibiotic therapy in treating infective endocarditis (IE) is not well established.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus for studies in which oral antibiotic therapy was used for the treatment of IE.

resultsSeven observational studies evaluating the use oral beta-lactams (five), oral ciprofloxacin in combination with rifampin (one), and linezolid (one) for the treatment of IE caused by susceptible bacteria reported cure rates between 77% and 100%. Two other observational studies using aureomycin or sulfonamide, however, had failure rates >75%. One clinical trial comparing oral amoxicillin versus intravenous ceftriaxone for streptococcal IE reported 100% cure in both arms but its reporting had serious methodological limitations. One small clinical trial (n = 85) comparing oral ciprofloxacin and rifampin versus conventional intravenous antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated right-sided S. aureus IE in intravenous drug users (IVDUs) reported cure rates of 89% and 90% in each arm, respectively (P =0.9); however, drug toxicities were more common in the latter group (62% versus 3%; P <0.01). Major limitations of this trial were lack of allocation concealment and blinding at the delivery of the study drug(s) and assessment of outcomes.

conclusionReported cure rates for IE treated with oral antibiotic regimens vary widely. The use of oral ciprofloxacin in combination with rifampin for uncomplicated right-sided S. aureus IE in IVDUs is supported by one small clinical trial of relatively good quality and could be considered when conventional IV antibiotic therapy is not possible.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAnti-Bacterial AgentsEndocarditis, BacterialHumansAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID24624933
PMCPMC4007569
OpenAlexW2045823446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.