ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Safety and Efficacy of Devices Delivering Inhaled Antibiotics among Adults with Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis: A Systematic Review and a Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Adult Bronchiectasis: Consensus-Based Guidelines of the German Respiratory Society.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2026Guideline
- Initiation of inhaled antibiotic therapy in chronic airway diseases: the REPAIR registry.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Nebulized Antibiotics for Preventing and Treating Gram-Negative Respiratory Infections in Critically Ill Patients: An Overview of Reviews.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Murepavadin Enhances the Killing Efficacy of Ciprofloxacin againstAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Aerosolised antibiotics in critical care.Intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- Monitoring disease progression in childhood bronchiectasis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
It remains unknown whether the type of aerosol generating device is affecting efficacy and safety among non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (NCFB) adults. The proposal of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to evaluate effectiveness and safety of inhaled antibiotics administered via dry powder inhaler (DPI) and via nebulizers (SVN) among adult patients with NCFB. Inclusion criteria were randomized-controlled trials, adults (≥18 years) with NCFB, and inhaled antibiotics administered via DPI as intervention. Search strategy was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from 2000 to 2019. Sixteen trials (2870 patients) were included. Three trials (all ciprofloxacin) used DPIs and thirteen used SVN (three ciprofloxacin). Both DPI and SVN devices achieved similar safety outcomes (adverse events, antibiotic discontinuation, severe adverse events, and bronchospasm). Administration of ciprofloxacin via DPI significantly improved time to first exacerbation (87 days, 95% CI 34.3-139.7) and quality of life (MD -7.52; 95% CI -13.06 to -1.98) when compared with via SVN. No other significant differences were documented in clinical efficacy (at least one exacerbation, FEV
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.