ArticlePloS one2021
Improved economic and clinical outcomes with oritavancin versus a comparator group for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in a community hospital.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oritavancin safety: a real-world pharmacovigilance study of the FAERS database.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Evaluating oritavancin for Gram-positive infections: a systematic review of on-label and off-label use.Drugs in context · 2026Article
- Role of Oritavancin in the Treatment of Infective Endocarditis, Catheter- or Device-Related Infections, Bloodstream Infections, and Bone and Prosthetic Joint Infections in Humans: Narrative Review and Possible Developments.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Kimyrsa and Orbactiv - A Tale of Two Formulations.Drug design, development and therapy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with in vitro bactericidal activity against gram-positive pathogens indicated for use in adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Its concentration-dependent activity and prolonged half-life provide a convenient single-dose alternative to multi-dose daily therapies for ABSSSI. This retrospective cohort study was conducted to quantify the clinical and economic advantages of using oritavancin compared to other antibiotic agents that have been historically effective for ABSSSI.
methodsSeventy-nine patients received oritavancin who had failed previous outpatient antibiotic therapy (OPAT) for cellulitis or abscess and were subsequently readmitted to the hospital as an inpatient between 2016 and 2018. These patients were compared to a cohort of 28 patients receiving other antibiotics following OPAT failure and subsequent hospitalization for these two infection types. The primary clinical end point was average length of stay (aLOS) and secondary endpoints included readmission rates for the same indication at 30 and 90 days after discharge and the average hospital cost (aHC).
resultsA total of 107 patients were hospitalized for treatment of cellulitis or abscess. Demographic characteristics of both the oritavancin and comparator groups were similar except for the presence of diabetes. The primary clinical endpoint showed a non-significant decrease in aLOS between the oritavancin group versus comparator (2.12 days versus 2.59 days; p = 0.097). The secondary endpoints revealed lower readmission rates associated with oritavancin treatment at 30 and 90 days; the average hospital cost was 5.9% lower for patients that received oritavancin.
conclusionThe results of this study demonstrate that oritavancin provides not only a single-dose alternative to multi-day therapies for skin and skin structure infections, but also a clinical and economic advantage compared to other antibiotic agents.
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.