ArticleJournal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada2019
Continuous cefazolin infusion versus cefazolin plus probenecid for the ambulatory treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada, 2019. 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.
- Safety and efficacy of continuous cefazolin infusion via peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) for outpatient therapy: a brief report.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The preferred ambulatory IV therapy for cellulitis is often once-daily cefazolin combined with once-daily oral probenecid (C+P). However, due to a national probenecid drug shortage in 2011, our centre developed a replacement protocol for the administration of cefazolin continuous infusion (CCI) using elastomeric infusers. Our goal was to compare treatment efficacy, duration of IV therapy, and recurrence associated with CCI and C+P using retrospective data from our centre. Methods: We conducted a non-inferiority single-centre retrospective cohort study of emergency department medical records. Patients received either C+P (cefazolin 2 g IV once daily plus probenecid 1 g PO once daily) or CCI (cefazolin 2 g IV loading dose, followed by cefazolin 6 g IV via continuous infusion over 24 hours, via an elastomeric infuser). We compared treatment efficacy, duration of IV therapy, and recurrence rates. Results: total of 203 patients were analyzed, with 107 included in the CCI arm and 96 in the C+P arm. Overall, CCI users and C+P users were comparable in their sociodemographic and clinical variables measured at admission. We observed increased odds of achieving successful treatment among the CCI group, however it did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio [OR] 2.25; 95% CI 0.84 to 6.07). Recurrence rates were similar between both groups (OR 1.91; 95% CI 0.32 to 11.31). The average duration of IV therapy was similar between groups ( Conclusions: ith results suggesting that CCI was non-inferior to C+P, and that both approaches required similar treatment durations, CCI could represent an acceptable alternative to C+P for the ambulatory IV treatment of cellulitis.
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.