ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2019
Lessons Learned From a Randomized Controlled Trial of Short-Course Intravenous Antibiotic Therapy for Erysipelas and Cellulitis of the Lower Limb (Switch Trial).
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Infection · 2022Pooled it
- Serological Responses toOpen forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Insufficient Representation of Patients With Obesity in Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Antimicrobials for Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: A Scoping Review.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of cellulitis is made clinically without a gold standard diagnostic test, and cellulitis has many disease mimics. There is currently no consensus for optimal antimicrobial treatment duration or method of antimicrobial delivery.
methodsThis was a randomized controlled open-label multicenter trial to determine the safety and efficacy of 24 hours of intravenous (IV) therapy compared with ≥72 hours of IV therapy, both followed by oral therapy to a maximum of 7-10 days' duration for the treatment of lower limb cellulitis.
resultsOver 40 months, 80 patients were recruited. Thirty-nine patients were assigned to 24 hours of IV antibiotics and 41 to ≥72 hours of IV antibiotics. The mean duration (range) of IV antibiotics in the 24-hour group was 25.5 (17-40) hours, and in the ≥72-hour group it was 78 (41.5-210) hours. Three patients in the 24-hour arm and 4 patients in the ≥72-hour arm were excluded from the analysis due to withdrawal from the trial. Analysis of the remaining patients revealed that 6 patients (4 in the intervention arm and 2 in the control arm) did not achieve an adequate response to therapy. Only 1 patient experienced self-limiting adverse effects of treatment.
conclusionsThe noninferiority of short-course IV therapy cannot be determined from this trial. Challenges included resource limitations for recruitment, misdiagnosis, participant withdrawal, and subjective responses to therapy based on visual assessment by treating clinicians. Further studies are needed to determine if short-course IV therapy is a suitable treatment option. AUSTRALIA COUNCIL OF CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY NO: ACTRN12613001366741.
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.