ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018
Retrospective review of ceftriaxone versus levofloxacin for treatment of E. coli urinary tract infections.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a local antibiogram for a teaching hospital in Ghana.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2023Article
- Comparison of high-performance liquid chromatography and ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometry to determine the best method to assess Levofloxacin released from mesoporous silica microspheres/nano-hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common bacterial infections. Options for initial treatment of pyelonephritis or UTI requiring hospitalization include levofloxacin (LVF) or extended-spectrum cephalosporins. Globally, uropathogenic Escherichia coli resistance rates to fluoroquinolones have increased in recent years. Objective To compare clinical outcomes of patients receiving ceftriaxone (CTX) to those who received LVF empirically for the treatment of E. coli UTI. Setting 433-bed community hospital in Lexington, KY. Methods Retrospective, single center, cohort study of adults with a urine culture positive for E. coli who received either IV LVF or CTX empirically for the treatment of UTI. Main outcome measure The primary outcome was hospital length of stay. Secondary outcomes include time to susceptible therapy (TsT), hospital cost, and susceptibility to empiric therapy. Results There was no statistically significant difference in LOS or hospital cost. Subgroup analysis compared patients that received concordant CTX treatment and patients that received discordant LVF treatment. Patients that received concordant CTX treatment had a nonsignificant shorter median LOS (4.16 vs. 6.34 days). Median hospital cost was lower ($4345 vs. $8462, p = 0.004) and median TsT was shorter (5.83 vs. 64.46 h, p < 0.001) in the concordant CTX group. Conclusion Choice of empiric antibiotic therapy should be based on local antibiogram data. For patients with UTI requiring hospitalization, CTX seems to be an effective empiric therapy for most patients. More data is required to examine the effectiveness of local and source specific antibiograms on clinical outcomes when guiding treatment of patients with UTI.
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.