ReviewCureus2022
Inhaled Antibiotics in Non-cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis (NCFB): A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Limitations in Adult Patients.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Dose Inhaled Colistin-Aminoglycoside Combination Therapy in Critically Ill Patients With Multidrug-ResistantCase reports in critical care · 2026Article
- Utilization of Inhaled Antibiotics in Pediatric Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis: A Comprehensive Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis has recently been under the spotlight due to a better detection rate with advanced imaging techniques. Recurrent infections in such patients are the main cause of their deterioration. This invariably leads to a catastrophic wheel of decline in lung function, reinfection, and repeated hospital consultations. The main goal of their management is based on the principles of prevention and vigorous treatment of recurrent infections. This review aimed to gather recent therapeutic options for inhaled antibacterial use in such patients and compare them for their properties of safety and efficacy. Studies done in the last 10 years on adult patients were gathered using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) strategy and later sorted using the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Research engines used include Google Scholar, PubMed, and the Saudi Digital Library. Out of the 31,739 articles identified initially, 1362 were screened. The final eight selected papers were assessed for quality by using the quality assessment checklist, the Cochrane bias assessment tool, the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) tools and cross-examined by co-authors. We concluded that the use of inhaled antibiotics as an adjuvant and follow-up treatment option is associated with better short and long-term prognoses in patients. They lead to lesser systemic side effects than the oral and intravenous varieties available on the market. However, the establishment of a hierarchy among the subgroups remains a grey area that needs further research.
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.