ReviewCurrent infectious disease reports2017
Once-Daily Treatments for Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Are They Good Enough?
Review in Current infectious disease reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04141787 (Ceftriaxone as Home Intravenous Therapy for Deep-Seated Staphylococcal Infections, a Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Ceftriaxone as Home Intravenous Therapy for Deep-Seated Staphylococcal Infections, a Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synergistic Antimicrobial Activity of Ceftriaxone andAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Real time monitoring of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm sensitivity towards antibiotics with isothermal microcalorimetry.PloS one · 2022Article
- Outcomes of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy With Ceftriaxone for Methicillin-SusceptibleOpen forum infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Intravenous Ceftriaxone Versus Multiple Dosing Regimes of Intravenous Anti-Staphylococcal Antibiotics for Methicillin-SusceptibleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Article
- Antibiotic-Derived Lipid Nanoparticles to Treat IntracellularACS applied bio materials · 2019Article
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
purpose of the reviewMethicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. First-line treatment requires frequent daily doses of an anti-staphylococcal beta-lactam. However, some physicians prescribe simpler once-daily regimens to improve compliance and improve healthcare utilization. We reviewed the literature regarding advantages, pitfalls, and efficacy of once-daily treatment options for MSSA bacteremia. RECENT
findingsSeveral once-daily antibiotics are effective in vitro against MSSA (ceftriaxone, daptomycin, telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, tedizolid, ertapenem, fluoroquinolones, and others), but there is insufficient evidence to support these agents for MSSA bacteremia. Ceftriaxone may be considered for therapy completion with MSSA bacteremia from osteomyelitis, and daptomycin may be considered in patients who cannot tolerate first-line therapy. However, they have not been compared to traditional second-line agents, and their role remains uncertain. Current evidence does not support the use of once-daily treatment options for MSSA bacteremia.
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.