ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Efficacy of Cefoperazone Sulbactam in Patients with
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of OneChoice AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Recommendations with Infectious Disease Specialists and Non-Specialists for Empirical Urinary Tract Infection Therapy in Lima, Peru.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Molecular Compatibility in Chinese Medicine for Cancer Treatment and Drug Development: From Traditional Wisdom to Innovative Therapeutics.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2026Article
- Empirical antibiotic therapy for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage-associated pneumonia: an ICU-based single-centered retrospective cohort study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Efficacy of cefoperazone-sulbactam as a component of combination therapy for carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii bloodstream infection in intensive care units: a multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Review
- Retrospective Analysis of Risk Factors for Cefoperazone/Sulbactam-Induced Thrombocytopenia in Adult Chinese Patients: A Six-Year Real-World Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Moving toward Extensively Drug-Resistant: Four-Year Antimicrobial Resistance Trends ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introduction
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of articles downloaded from Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (through June 2022) to study the efficacy of CS in treating AB infections. Our review evaluated patients treated with CS alone and CS in combination with other antibiotics separately. The following outcomes were studied: clinical cure, microbiological cure, and mortality from any cause.
resultsWe included 16 studies where CS was used for the treatment of AB infections. This included 11 studies where CS was used alone and 10 studies where CS was used in combination. The outcomes were similar in both groups. We found that the pooled clinical cure, microbiological cure, and mortality with CS alone for AB were 70%, 44%, and 20%, respectively. The pooled clinical cure, microbiological cure, and mortality when CS was used in combination with other antibiotics were 72%, 43%, and 21%, respectively.
conclusionsCS alone or in combination needs to be further explored for the treatment of AB infections. There is a need for randomized controlled trials with comparator drugs to evaluate the drug's effectiveness.
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.