Observational studyCritical care (London, England)2019
Comparative efficacy of linezolid and vancomycin for endotracheal tube MRSA biofilms from ICU patients.
Observational study in Critical care (London, England), 2019. 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, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Severe co-infection with influenza A virus H3N2 and community-acquired methicillin-susceptibleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- β-Lapachone encapsulated into stealth liposomes: inhibition of biofilm and cell wall thickness of MRSA.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025Article
- Biofilm Production in Intensive Care Units: Challenges and Implications.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Optimizing Diagnosis and Management of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Systematic Evaluation of Biofilm Detection Methods and Bacterial Colonization on Endotracheal Tubes.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Bacterial Adaptive Memory in Methicillin-ResistantPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Clinical efficacy and safety of linezolid in intensive care unit patients.Journal of intensive medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Plasma and Intrapulmonary Pharmacokinetics, and Dosage Regimen Optimization of Linezolid for Treatment of Gram-Positive Cocci Infections in Patients with Pulmonary Infection After Cerebral Hemorrhage.Infection and drug resistance · 2022Article
- Recalcitrant Staphylococcus aureus Infections: Obstacles and Solutions.Infection and immunity · 2021Review
- First Case of Staphylococci Carrying Linezolid Resistance Genes from Laryngological Infections in Poland.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Reconsidering ventilator-associated pneumonia from a new dimension of the lung microbiome.EBioMedicine · 2020Review
- Antimicrobial Photoinactivation Approach Based on Natural Agents for Control of Bacteria Biofilms in Spacecraft.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Molecular characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clinical strains from the endotracheal tubes of patients with nosocomial pneumonia.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy of systemic treatment with linezolid (LNZ) versus vancomycin (VAN) on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) burden and eradication in endotracheal tube (ETT) biofilm and ETT cuff from orotracheally intubated patients with MRSA respiratory infection.
methodsProspective observational clinical study was carried out at four European tertiary hospitals. Plasma and endotracheal aspirate (ETA) levels of LNZ and VAN were determined 72 h after treatment initiation through high-performance liquid chromatography or bioassay. LNZ or VAN concentration in the ETT biofilm and MRSA burden and eradication was determined upon extubation. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for LNZ and VAN was assessed by E-test strips (Biomerieux®). Scanning electron microscopy images were obtained, and ETT biofilm thickness was compared between groups.
resultsTwenty-five patients, 15 treated with LNZ and 10 with VAN, were included in the study. LNZ presented a significantly higher concentration (μg/mL) than VAN in ETT biofilm (72.8 [1.3-127.1] vs 0.4 [0.4-1.3], p < 0.001), although both drugs achieved therapeutic plasma levels 72 h after treatment initiation. Systemic treatment with LNZ achieved lower ETT cuff MRSA burdens than systemic treatment with VAN. Indeed, LNZ increased the MRSA eradication rate in ETT cuff compared with VAN (LNZ 75%, VAN 20%, p = 0.031).
conclusionsIn ICU patients with MRSA respiratory infection intubated for long periods, systemic treatment with LNZ obtains a greater beneficial effect than VAN in limiting MRSA burden in ETT cuff.
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.