SynthesisBMC pediatrics2019
Intravenous versus intravenous/oral antibiotics for perforated appendicitis in pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Shortened Postoperative Antibiotic Regimens in Children with Perforated Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie · 2026Pooled it
- Post-discharge oral home antibiotic use in complicated pediatric appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring oral antibiotics for antibiotic stewardship in nonoperative management of complicated appendicitis in pediatric patients.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
- Oral vs Intravenous Discharge Antibiotic Regimens in the Management of Intra-abdominal Abscesses in Penetrating Crohn's Disease.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2024Article
- Perforated Appendicitis in Children: Management, Microbiology, and Antibiotic Stewardship.Paediatric drugs · 2024Review
- Management of complicated acute appendicitis in children: Still an existing controversy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of oral (PO) antibiotics following a course of certain intravenous (IV) antibiotics is proposed in order to avoid the complications of IV medications and to decrease the cost. However, the efficacy and safety of sequential IV/PO antibiotics is unclear and requires further study.
methodsThe databases, including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, were searched. Studies comparing outcomes in patients with perforated appendicitis receiving sequential IV/PO and PO antibiotics therapy were screened. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Jadad score were used to evaluate the quality of the cohort and the randomized controlled portions of the trial, respectively. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I
resultsFive controlled studies including a total of 580 patients were evaluated. The pooled estimates revealed that sequential IV/PO antibiotic therapy did not increase the risk of complications, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.97 (95% CI 0.51-1.83, P = 0.93) for postoperative abscess, 1.04 (95% CI 0.25-4.36, P = 0.96) for wound infection and 0.62 (95% CI 0.33-1.16, P = 0.13) for readmission.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates that sequential IV/PO antibiotic therapy is noninferior to IV antibiotic therapy regarding postoperative abscess, wound infection and readmission.
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.