SynthesisMedicine2020
Staphylococcus saccharolyticus infection: case series with a PRISMA-compliant systemic review.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Monitoring bacterial contamination of blood components at the Croatian Institute of Transfusion Medicine-Evolution of strategies and results in a 14-year period (2011-2024).Vox sanguinis · 2026Article
- Article
- A first case of subdural empyema due toIDCases · 2024Article
- Cryptic Oral Microbiota: What Is Its Role as Obstructive Sleep Apnea-Related Periodontal Pathogens?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Biofilm formation and inflammatory potential ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Nanomedicine to fight infectious disease.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2021Review
- Update on Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci-What the Clinician Should Know.Microorganisms · 2021Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStaphylococcus saccharolyticus is a rare cause of human infectious disease. The clinical characteristics and treatment of patients with S saccharolyticus infections remain largely unknown.
objectivesWe present the first reported case of empyema due to S saccharolyticus. In addition, a systematic review and pooled analysis of all S saccharolyticus cases were done to summarize the clinical and microbiological characteristics and treatment of this rare pathogen.
methodsA case of empyema caused by S saccharolyticus diagnosed in study hospital was reported. This case and those identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were analyzed.
resultsIn total, 8 patients were reviewed. The averages of the white blood cell count, sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein were 16.8 × 10/L, 72 mm/h, and 176 mg/L, respectively. The average time-to-positivity of the anaerobic cultures was 5 days. The S saccharolyticus was resistant to metronidazole, but susceptible to fluoroquinolones, clindamycin, and vancomycin in all the cases with drug sensitivity tests available for these antibiotics. Two of 7 patients showed resistance to all β-lactams. Both of those patients finally died.
conclusionsS saccharolyticus should be added to the list of anaerobic microorganisms that are able to cause empyema. A prolonged anaerobic culture is critical to improve the yield of this possibly underestimated pathogen. The time to positive culture of S saccharolyticus may not help to distinguish true-positive growth from contaminated growth. Acute or subacute courses and systemic evidence of infection may contribute to judge the clinical significance of positive cultures and avoid unnecessary antibiotic treatment. β-Lactam agents plus fluoroquinolones or vancomycin/teicoplanin or clindamycin may be appropriate to achieve full coverage of the β-lactam resistant bacteria.
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.