ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2020
Clinical Benefits of Piperacillin/Tazobactam versus a Combination of Ceftriaxone and Clindamycin in the Treatment of Early, Non-Ventilator, Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia in a Community-Based Hospital.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Antipseudomonal Antibiotics in Patients with Bronchiectasis Who Experienced Exacerbation or Developed Pneumonia: A Nationwide Study in Japan.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
purposeThere is an increasing prevalence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) organisms worldwide. Therefore, broad-spectrum antibiotics are recommended in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). However, it remains controversial whether patients with early onset, non-ventilator HAP (NV-HAP) should also be empirically treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics. We compared the clinical benefit of ceftriaxone plus clindamycin vs piperacillin/tazobactam as the initial empirical treatment of adults with early NV-HAP. PATIENTS AND
methodsRetrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients who were diagnosed with early, NV-HAP between January 2013 and June 2017 at a community-based tertiary care hospital. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had received empiric treatment with either ceftriaxone and clindamycin or piperacillin/tazobactam for at least 3 days. Patients with increased risk of MDR pathogens were excluded.
resultsA total of 89 patients were treated with ceftriaxone and clindamycin, while 124 received piperacillin/tazobactam. There were no significant differences between the two antibiotic groups with regard to median age, sex, or risk of pneumonia. The 30-day all-cause mortality did not differ significantly between the ceftriaxone plus clindamycin and piperacillin/tazobactam groups (4.5% vs 1.6%, P=0.202, respectively). However, in multivariate analysis, clinical failure was more frequent in the ceftriaxone plus clindamycin group than in the piperacillin/tazobactam group (HR 3.316; 95% CI, 1.589-6918, P=0.001).
conclusionTreatment with piperacillin/tazobactam was more effective than that with ceftriaxone plus clindamycin in patients with early NV-HAP. This study supports the recent treatment recommendations that patients with early NV-HAP should be treated empirically with broad-spectrum antibiotics.
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.