ReviewDrug, healthcare and patient safety2023
The Clinical Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Vancomycin for the Treatment of Recurrent
Review in Drug, healthcare and patient safety, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Repurposing azole antifungals as rapid bactericidal, membrane-disruptive therapeutics againstMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Therapeutics involved in managing initial and recurrentWorld journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was to examine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vancomycin for treatment of recurrent Methods: The PubMed database was searched from inception to August 23, 2022. An initial screening was performed followed by a full-text evaluation of the papers. Inclusion criteria were RCTs investigating vancomycin for treatment of rCDI. Results: A total of six studies and 269 patients were included in the review. Three studies used a fixed dose regimen of vancomycin, one study used pulse regimen, one study used a taper-and-pulse regimen, and one study used a taper-and-pulse regimen for the participants with two or more recurrences. The resolution of infection varied from 19% to 58.3% in five of six studies reporting this as an outcome. Four out of six studies reported new episodes of rCDI as an intervention outcome, in those studies 50-63% of participants experienced rCDI. Regarding the safety and tolerability of vancomycin treatment for rCDI, one study described several adverse events regarding gastrointestinal discomfort along with fatigue and skin rash. There were no records of serious adverse events in the included studies. Conclusion: While oral vancomycin is mostly safe and well tolerated in the RCTs reviewed here, the efficacy for treating rCDI varies greatly from 19-58.3%, and 50-63% of participants experienced new episodes of rCDI.
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.