ArticleHeliyon2023
The effect of meropenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam in critically ill patients with sepsis and septic shock.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of meropenem plus ulinastatin on inflammatory response and complications in patients with severe septic shock.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative Impact of an Optimized PK/PD Target Attainment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam vs. Meropenem on the Trend over Time of SOFA Score and Inflammatory Biomarkers in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Infusion Monotherapy for Treating Documented Gram-Negative BSIs and/or VAP.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antibiotics are a popular and efficient treatment for sepsis and septic shock. However, there is presently little proof of Meropenem with piperacillin-therapeutic tazobactam's benefits. Methods: From January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2021, we treated a total of 1244 patients with sepsis and septic shock using either Meropenem (n = 622, 1 g every 8 h) or piperacillin-tazobactam (n = 622, 3.375 g or 4.5 g every 8 h). The intervention was administered for 7 days following randomization and continued for up to 14 days thereafter, or until the patient was discharged from the critical care unit or passed away, whichever occurred first. Results: First, we discovered that there were no significant changes in the duration of stay in ICU, Cardiovascular in SOFA, Coagulation in SOFA, Hepatic in SOFA, or Central Nervous System in SOFA between the meropenem alone group and the piperacillin-tazobactam group. In addition, WBC beyond the standard limit was 68.00% in the meropenem alone group against 61.89% in the piperacillin-tazobactam group (P = 0.03). However, Meropenem had a lower mortality rate on ventilator-free days, vasopressor-free days, and hospital-free days. Conclusion: This procedure may offer clinical evidence for the safety and efficacy of meropenem with piperacillin-tazobactam in critically sick patients with sepsis and septic shock.
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.