SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Pre-admission antibiotics for suspected cases of meningococcal disease.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early vs. delayed empiric antimicrobial treatment for suspected acute meningitis - a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Osmotic therapies added to antibiotics for acute bacterial meningitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Identification of knowledge gaps in whole-genome sequence analysis of multi-resistant thermotolerant Campylobacter spp.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- An Overview of Clinical Manifestations of Dermatological Disorders in Intensive Care Units: What Should Intensivists Be Aware of?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Nonspecific symptoms dominate at first contact to emergency healthcare services among cases with invasive meningococcal disease.BMC family practice · 2021Observational
- Care of the patient with invasive meningococcal disease by prehospital emergency medical service clinicians: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeningococcal disease can lead to death or disability within hours after onset. Pre-admission antibiotics aim to reduce the risk of serious disease and death by preventing delays in starting therapy before confirmation of the diagnosis.
objectivesTo study the effectiveness and safety of pre-admission antibiotics versus no pre-admission antibiotics or placebo, and different pre-admission antibiotic regimens in decreasing mortality, clinical failure, and morbidity in people suspected of meningococcal disease. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL (6 January 2017), MEDLINE (1966 to 6 January 2017), Embase (1980 to 6 January 2017), Web of Science (1985 to 6 January 2017), LILACS (1982 to 6 January 2017), and prospective trial registries to January 2017. We previously searched CAB Abstracts from 1985 to June 2015, but did not update this search in January 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention, in people with suspected meningococcal infection, or different antibiotics administered before admission to hospital or confirmation of the diagnosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data from the search results. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous data. We included only one trial and so did not perform data synthesis. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsWe found no RCTs comparing pre-admission antibiotics versus no pre-admission antibiotics or placebo. We included one open-label, non-inferiority RCT with 510 participants, conducted during an epidemic in Niger, evaluating a single dose of intramuscular ceftriaxone versus a single dose of intramuscular long-acting (oily) chloramphenicol. Ceftriaxone was not inferior to chloramphenicol in reducing mortality (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.56; N = 503; 308 confirmed meningococcal meningitis; 26 deaths; moderate-quality evidence), clinical failures (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.15; N = 477; 18 clinical failures; moderate-quality evidence), or neurological sequelae (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.62; N = 477; 29 with sequelae; low-quality evidence). No adverse effects of treatment were reported. Estimated treatment costs were similar. No data were available on disease burden due to sequelae. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe found no reliable evidence to support the use pre-admission antibiotics for suspected cases of non-severe meningococcal disease. Moderate-quality evidence from one RCT indicated that single intramuscular injections of ceftriaxone and long-acting chloramphenicol were equally effective, safe, and economical in reducing serious outcomes. The choice between these antibiotics should be based on affordability, availability, and patterns of antibiotic resistance.Further RCTs comparing different pre-admission antibiotics, accompanied by intensive supportive measures, are ethically justified in people with less severe illness, and are needed to provide reliable evidence in different clinical settings.
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.