Trial reportAnnals of emergency medicine2018
Subgroup Analysis of Antibiotic Treatment for Skin Abscesses.
Trial report in Annals of emergency medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Progress in topical nanoformulations against bacterial skin and soft tissue infections- current trends.Drug delivery and translational research · 2025Review
- Phage Therapy as an Alternative Treatment Modality for ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Purulent Skin and Soft Tissue Infections, Challenging the Practice of Incision and Drainage: A Scoping Review.Nursing research and practice · 2023Article
- Article
- Management and Prevention of Staphylococcus aureus Infections in Children.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2022Review
- Treatment of methicillin-resistantJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2021Review
- Narrative Review: The Process of Expanding the Manual of Antimicrobial Stewardship by the Government of Japan.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2021Review
- Skin and Soft Tissue Infection Treatment and Prevention Practices by Pediatric Infectious Diseases Providers.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2020Article
- Antibiotic Duration, but Not Abscess Size, Impacts Clinical Cure of Limited Skin and Soft Tissue Infection After Incision and Drainage.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2020Article
- Antibiotics Should Not Be Routinely Prescribed After Incision and Drainage of Uncomplicated Abscesses.Annals of emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Prevention Strategies for Recurrent Community-Associated Staphylococcus aureus Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.Current infectious disease reports · 2019Review
- Antimicrobial Stewardship in the Emergency Department.Emergency medicine clinics of North America · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveTwo large randomized trials recently demonstrated efficacy of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-active antibiotics for drained skin abscesses. We determine whether outcome advantages observed in one trial exist across lesion sizes and among subgroups with and without guideline-recommended antibiotic indications.
methodsWe conducted a planned subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized trial at 5 US emergency departments, demonstrating superiority of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (320/1,600 mg twice daily for 7 days) compared with placebo for patients older than 12 years with a drained skin abscess. We determined between-group differences in rates of clinical (no new antibiotics) and composite cure (no new antibiotics or drainage) through 7 to 14 and 42 to 56 days after treatment among subgroups with and without abscess cavity or erythema diameter greater than or equal to 5 cm, history of MRSA, fever, diabetes, and comorbidities. We also evaluated treatment effect by lesion size and culture result.
resultsAmong 1,057 mostly adult participants, median abscess cavity and erythema diameters were 2.5 cm (range 0.1 to 16.0 cm) and 6.5 cm (range 1.0 to 38.5), respectively; 44.3% grew MRSA. Overall, for trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and placebo groups, clinical cure rate at 7 to 14 days was 92.9% and 85.7%; composite cure rate at 7 to 14 days was 86.5% and 74.3%, and at 42 to 56 days, it was 82.4% and 70.2%. For all outcomes, across lesion sizes and among subgroups with and without guideline antibiotic criteria, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was associated with improved outcomes. Treatment effect was greatest with history of MRSA infection, fever, and positive MRSA culture.
conclusionTreatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was associated with improved outcomes regardless of lesion size or guideline antibiotic criteria.
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.