ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2023
Comparison of Adjuvant Clindamycin vs Linezolid for Severe Invasive Group A
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel integrative and conjugative element inmSphere · 2026Article
- Clindamycin and intravenous immunoglobulins in pediatric invasive group A streptococcal disease: what is the evidence?European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Top unanswered questions in antimicrobial management of necrotizing soft tissue infections.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026Review
- Evolving treatment strategies for invasive Streptococcus pyogenes in children in the postpandemic era.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2025Article
- Antibiotic therapy in necrotizing soft tissue infections: a narrative review of the greater Paris SURFAST consortium.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Current Clinical Practice on the Management of Invasive Streptococcus Pyogenes Infections in Children: A Survey-Based Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Optimizing Antibiotic Choice, Administration, and Duration in NSTI Treatment.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Streptococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approaches Incorporating Point-of-Care Antigen Testing-Case Series.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- Adjunctive linezolid versus clindamycin for toxin inhibition in β-lactam-treated patients with invasive group A streptococcal infections in 195 US hospitals from 2016 to 2021: a retrospective cohort study with target trial emulation.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Severe Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection Following Fish Spine Injury: A Case Report and Literature Review.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Case Report: From septic shock to recovery - a battle against lethal necrotizing soft tissue infection.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Invasive group A Streptococcus infection (Streptococcus pyogenes): Current situation in Spain.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2024Article
- [Necrotizing soft tissue infections].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024Review
- Assessing the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence, clinical presentation, and clindamycin resistance rates ofIJID regions · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Linezolid may be an option for severe group A Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study examined patients with GAS isolated from blood and/or tissue cultures with invasive soft tissue infection or necrotizing fasciitis who underwent surgical debridement and received linezolid or clindamycin for at least 48 hours. The primary outcome was percentage change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score from baseline through 72 hours of hospitalization. Results: After adjustment for time to first surgical intervention among patients with a baseline SOFA score >0 (n = 23 per group), there was no difference in reduction of SOFA score over the first 72 hours in patients receiving clindamycin vs linezolid. In the entire cohort (n = 26, clindamycin; n = 29, linezolid), there was no difference in inpatient mortality (2% vs 1%) or any secondary outcomes, including duration of vasopressor therapy, intensive care unit length of stay, and antibiotic-associated adverse drug events. Conclusions: There was no difference in reduction of critical illness as measured by SOFA score between baseline and 72 hours among patients treated with clindamycin vs linezolid. Given its more favorable side effect profile, linezolid may be a viable option for the treatment of serious GAS infections and should be further studied.
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.