Trial reportThe New England journal of medicine2015
Clindamycin versus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for uncomplicated skin infections.
Trial report in The New England journal of medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00730028 (Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of Clindamycin, Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole, or Placebo for Uncomplicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections Caused by Community-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus), which is not on this map. Cited by 59 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of Clindamycin, Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole, or Placebo for Uncomplicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections Caused by Community-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus
Who cites it
59 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 192 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Newer glycopeptide antibiotics for treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost analysis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2018Pooled it
- Antibiotics for uncomplicated skin abscesses: systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2018Pooled it
- A Placebo-Controlled Trial of Antibiotics for Smaller Skin Abscesses.The New England journal of medicine · 2017Trial
- Impact of Staphylococcus aureus USA300 Colonization and Skin Infections on Systemic Immune Responses in Humans.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2016Trial
- A Randomized Trial of Clindamycin Versus Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for Uncomplicated Wound Infection.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2016Trial
- Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026Review
- Children Treated for Slow-flow Vascular Malformations: Overall Description and Focus on Complications Such as Cellulitis.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2025Article
- A Decade of Pediatric CA-MRSA Surveillance in Northern Taiwan: Retrospective Resistance Analysis and Recent Genotypic Characterization.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Review
- Secondary Bacterial Infections in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis or Other Common Dermatoses.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2024Review
- Recent development and fighting strategies for lincosamide antibiotic resistance.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Dalbavancin for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections in Pediatrics: Insights from Continuation Therapy Experience.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
- Treatment of MRSA Infection: Where are We?Current medicinal chemistry · 2024Review
- New Perianal Sepsis Risk Score Predicts Outcome of Elderly Patients with Perianal Abscesses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Clinical Impact ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Antibiotic susceptibility and clonal distribution ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- The Effect of Systemic Antibiotics for Suppurative Skin and Soft Tissue Infections on the Skin Microbiome.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Cellulitis: A Review of Current Practice Guidelines and Differentiation from Pseudocellulitis.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSkin and skin-structure infections are common in ambulatory settings. However, the efficacy of various antibiotic regimens in the era of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is unclear.
methodsWe enrolled outpatients with uncomplicated skin infections who had cellulitis, abscesses larger than 5 cm in diameter (smaller for younger children), or both. Patients were enrolled at four study sites. All abscesses underwent incision and drainage. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either clindamycin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) for 10 days. Patients and investigators were unaware of the treatment assignments and microbiologic test results. The primary outcome was clinical cure 7 to 10 days after the end of treatment.
resultsA total of 524 patients were enrolled (264 in the clindamycin group and 260 in the TMP-SMX group), including 155 children (29.6%). One hundred sixty patients (30.5%) had an abscess, 280 (53.4%) had cellulitis, and 82 (15.6%) had mixed infection, defined as at least one abscess lesion and one cellulitis lesion. S. aureus was isolated from the lesions of 217 patients (41.4%); the isolates in 167 (77.0%) of these patients were MRSA. The proportion of patients cured was similar in the two treatment groups in the intention-to-treat population (80.3% in the clindamycin group and 77.7% in the TMP-SMX group; difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.2 to 4.9; P=0.52) and in the populations of patients who could be evaluated (466 patients; 89.5% in the clindamycin group and 88.2% in the TMP-SMX group; difference, -1.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to 5.1; P=0.77). Cure rates did not differ significantly between the two treatments in the subgroups of children, adults, and patients with abscess versus cellulitis. The proportion of patients with adverse events was similar in the two groups.
conclusionsWe found no significant difference between clindamycin and TMP-SMX, with respect to either efficacy or side-effect profile, for the treatment of uncomplicated skin infections, including both cellulitis and abscesses. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00730028.).
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.