SynthesisPloS one2017
Should preventive antibiotics be used in patients with acute stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gastrointestinal Dysfunction and Dysbiosis in Ischemic Stroke: Opportunities for Therapeutic Intervention.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Post-Stroke Pneumonia in Real-World Practice: Background, Microbiological Examination, and Treatment.Neurology international · 2023Article
- Interventional strategies for ischemic stroke based on the modulation of the gut microbiota.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Review
- Review
- Inflammation, Autoimmunity, Infection, and Stroke: Epidemiology and Lessons From Therapeutic Intervention.Stroke · 2020Review
- Healthcare-Associated Infections in the Neurocritical Care Unit.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2019Review
- Immunomodulatory Therapeutic Strategies in Stroke.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfection is a common complication in acute stroke. Whether or not preventive antibiotics reduce the risk of infection or even lead to a favorable outcome and reduction of mortality after a stroke still remains equivocal. This review was performed to update the current knowledge on the effect and possible benefits of prophylactic antibiotic therapy in patients with stroke.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of preventive antibiotics`effect on the incidence of infection, favorable outcome (mRS≤2) and mortality in patients with acute stroke is performed with relevant randomized controlled trials.
resultsSix studies were identified, involving 4125 participants. Compared with the control group, the treated groups were significantly less prone to suffer from early overall infections [RR = 0.52, 95%CI (0.39, 0.70), p<0.0001], early pneumonia [RR = 0.64, 95%CI (0.42, 0.96), p = 0.03] and early urinary tract infections [RR = 0.35, 95%CI (0.25, 0.48), p<0.00001]. However, there was no significant difference in overall mortality [RR = 1.07, 95%CI (0.90, 1.27), p = 0.44], early mortality [RR = 0.99, 95%CI (0.78, 1.26), p = 0.92], late mortality [RR = 1.12, 95%CI (0.94, 1.35), p = 0.21] or favorable outcome [RR = 1.00, 95%CI (0.92, 1.08), p = 0.98].
conclusionAlthough preventive antibiotic treatment did reduce the occurrence of early overall infections, early pneumonia and early urinary tract infection in patients with acute stroke, this advantage was not eventually translated to a favorable outcome and reduction in mortality. Future studies are warranted to identify any subgroup of stroke patients who might benefit from preventive antibiotic treatment.
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.