ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2023
Real-World Application of Oral Therapy for Infective Endocarditis: A Multicenter, Retrospective, Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05977868 (Comparing Oral Versus Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 32 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.
Comparing Oral Versus Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy (COPAT) Trial
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Efficacy of Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy (OPAT) in Patients With Infective Endocarditis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- Cefadroxil as Oral Transitional Therapy for Gram-Positive Bacteremia With or Without Non-Vertebral Osteomyelitis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Review
- Optimizing Treatment of Infective Endocarditis in Patients Who Inject Drugs.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Partial Oral Antibiotic Therapy for Infective Endocarditis: A Practical Review of Current Evidence and Guidelines.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- IV-Oral Antibiotic Switch in Streptococcal and Enterococcal Endocarditis: Evaluating ESC Versus WikiGuideline Criteria.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
- Impact of Institutional Expected Practice Guidelines on Oral and Long-acting Intravenous Antibiotic Use for Serious Bacterial Infections.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Real-World Infective Endocarditis in a Regional Hospital: Clinical Severity, Guideline Adherence, and Determinants of In-Hospital Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Current Management of Infective Endocarditis: A Narrative Review Focused on Unmet Clinical Needs and the Multidisciplinary Approach.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Should We Extend the Use of Oral Antibiotics in Infective Endocarditis? The ENDO-ORAL Study.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Contezolid as Salvage Treatment for Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Oral Therapy for Infective Endocarditis: Where Do We Stand?Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Experience of use of dalbavancin for the treatment of unlicensed indications in a UK tertiary infectious diseases setting.Infection · 2025Article
- Partial Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Therapy for Endocarditis With Management by a Multidisciplinary Team: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Partial Oral Therapy for Infective Endocarditis Among Adult Infectious Diseases Physicians in the United States: An Emerging Infections Network Survey.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Antibiotic adherence and treatment completion associated with partial oral therapy versus all intravenous therapy in patients with serious Staphylococcus aureus infections.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Interpreting Blood Culture Results as Early Guidance for Infective Endocarditis.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Trends in the Management of Infective Endocarditis for Patients Who Inject Drugs: A Survey of Healthcare Facilities in Tennessee.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Switching from intravenous to oral antibiotic therapy in the treatment of infective endocarditis: a case series and literature review of real-world data.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
- Association Between Inpatient Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder and Reduced One-Year All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Invasive Bacterial Infections.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe sought to compare the outcomes of patients treated with intravenous (IV)-only vs oral transitional antimicrobial therapy for infective endocarditis (IE) after implementing a new expected practice within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC DHS).
methodsWe conducted a multicentered, retrospective cohort study of adults with definite or possible IE treated with IV-only vs oral therapy at the 3 acute care public hospitals in the LAC DHS system between December 2018 and June 2022. The primary outcome was clinical success at 90 days, defined as being alive and without recurrence of bacteremia or treatment-emergent infectious complications.
resultsWe identified 257 patients with IE treated with IV-only (n = 211) or oral transitional (n = 46) therapy who met study inclusion criteria. Study arms were similar for many demographics; however, the IV cohort was older, had more aortic valve involvement, were hemodialysis patients, and had central venous catheters present. In contrast, the oral cohort had a higher percentage of IE caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. There was no significant difference between the groups in clinical success at 90 days or last follow-up. There was no difference in recurrence of bacteremia or readmission rates. However, patients treated with oral therapy had significantly fewer adverse events. Multivariable regression adjustments did not find significant associations between any selected variables and clinical success across treatment groups.
conclusionsThese results demonstrate similar outcomes of real-world use of oral vs IV-only therapy for IE, in accord with prior randomized, controlled trials and meta-analyses.
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.