ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2017
[New antibiotics - standstill or progress].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acquaintance and Awareness of Budding Physicians toward Antimicrobials' Use: Need of the Hour.Journal of laboratory physicians · 2022Article
- Antibiotic Use: A Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating the Understanding, Usage and Perspectives of Medical Students and Pathfinders of a Public Defence University in Malaysia.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Article
- Synthesis and Bioactivity Evaluation of N-Arylsulfonylindole Analogs Bearing a Rhodanine Moiety as Antibacterial Agents.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of resistance to antibiotics has been ignored for a long time. But nowadays, increasing resistance is an important topic. For a decade no new antibiotics had been developed and it is not possible to quickly close this gap of new resistance and no new drugs. This work presents six new antibiotics (ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, solithromycin, tedizolid, ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam). In part, only expert opinions are given due to lack of study results.The two 5th generation cephalosporins ceftaroline and ceftobiprole have beside their equivalent efficacy to ceftriaxone (ceftaroline) and cefipim (ceftobiprole) high activity against MRSA. The fluoroketolide solithromycin should help against macrolide-resistant pathogens and has been shown to be noninferior to the fluorochinolones. The oxazolidinone tedizolid is effective against linezolid-resistant MRSA. The two cephalosporins ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam are not only effective against gram-negative pathogens, but they have a very broad spectrum. Due to the efficacy against extended-spectrum β‑lactamases, they can relieve the selection pressure of the carbapenems. We benefit from all new antibiotics which can take the selection pressure from other often used antibiotics. The increasing number of resistant gram-negative pathogens worldwide is alarming. Thus, focusing on the development of new drugs is extremely important.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28314920What 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.