ArticlePloS one2016
Mupirocin in the Treatment of Staphylococcal Infections in Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Effects in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies of Pharmacological Interventions: A Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Mupirocin Ointment Effect on Polyposis Recurrence After Sinus Surgery.Iranian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2024Article
- A large-volume low-pressure nasal irrigation delivers drug into the nasal cavity? An in vivo study.Drug delivery and translational research · 2024Article
- The intra-host evolutionary landscape and pathoadaptation of persistentMicrobial genomics · 2023Article
- Endoscopic outcomes in patients with AERD treated with topical antibiotics and intranasal corticosteroids.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Current Perspective on Nasal Delivery Systems for Chronic Rhinosinusitis.Pharmaceutics · 2021Review
- Antibiotics Affect ROS Production and Fibroblast Migration in anFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSaline irrigation of the nasal cavity is a classic and effective treatment for acute or chronic rhinosinusitis. Topical antibiotics such as mupirocin have been widely used for recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of saline irrigation using mupirocin.
methodsA systematic literature review and meta-analysis of mupirocin saline irrigation were performed using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane library through December 2015. Data were analyzed with R 3.2.2 software. A random effects model was used because of the diversity of included studies. Sensitivity analysis of particular tested groups and single proportion tests were also performed. The main outcome measure was residual staphylococcal infection, as confirmed by culture or PCR.
resultsTwo RCTs, two prospective studies and two retrospective studies were included. A random effects model meta-analysis of the pooled data identified a relative risk of residual infection of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.06-0.26, p<0.05) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). The proportion of residual staphylococcal infections after 1 month was 0.08 (95% CI: 0.04-0.16). However, this proportion increased to 0.53 at 6 months (95% CI: 0.27-0.78).
conclusionsThe short-term use of mupirocin has a strongly reductive effect on staphylococcal infection in chronic rhinosinusitis. Although there is currently a lack of clear evidence, future studies with well-designed inclusion criteria and randomized controlled trials are needed to examine mupirocin's long-term effect on chronic rhinosinusitis.
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.