ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2022
Pharmacodynamic evaluation of piperacillin/tazobactam versus meropenem against extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing and non-producing Escherichia coli clinical isolates in a hollow-fibre infection model.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction and external validation of an early warning model for piperacillin/tazobactam-associated hypokalemia in critically ill patients.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Whole-genome sequencing and bioinformatic tools powered by machine learning to identify antibiotic-resistant genes and virulence factors inMicrobial genomics · 2025Article
- 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUrosepsis caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli is increasing worldwide. Carbapenems are commonly recommended for the treatment of ESBL infections; however, to minimize the emergence of carbapenem resistance, interest in alternative treatments has heightened.
objectivesThis study compared pharmacodynamics of piperacillin/tazobactam versus meropenem against ESBL-producing and non-producing E. coli clinical isolates.
methodsE. coli isolates, obtained from national reference laboratory in Bangladesh, were characterized by phenotypic tests, WGS, susceptibility tests and mutant frequency analysis. Three ESBL-producing and two non-producing E. coli were exposed to piperacillin/tazobactam (4.5 g, every 6 h and every 8 h, 30 min infusion) and meropenem (1 g, every 8 h, 30 min infusion) in a hollow-fibre infection model over 7 days.
resultsPiperacillin/tazobactam regimens attained ∼4-5 log10 cfu/mL bacterial killing within 24 h and prevented resistance emergence over the experiment against ESBL-producing and non-producing E. coli. However, compared with 8 hourly meropenem, the 6 hourly piperacillin/tazobactam attained ∼1 log10 lower bacterial kill against one of three ESBL-producing E. coli (CTAP#173) but comparable killing for the other two ESBL-producing (CTAP#168 and CTAP#169) and two non-producing E. coli (CTAP#179 and CTAP#180). The 6 hourly piperacillin/tazobactam regimen attained ∼1 log10 greater bacterial kill compared with the 8 hourly regimen against CTAP#168 and CTAP#179 at 24 h.
conclusionsOur study suggests piperacillin/tazobactam may be a potential alternative to carbapenems to treat urosepsis caused by ESBL-producing E. coli, although clinical trials with robust design are needed to confirm non-inferiority of outcome.
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.