Trial reportBMC research notes2024
Comparison of three doses of amikacin on alternate days with a daily dose of meropenem during the same period for the treatment of urinary tract infection with E. coli: a double-blind clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are very common infections in humans, and Escherichia coli (E. coli) is the commonest pathogen leading to UTIs. The generation of beta-lactamase enzymes in this bacterium results in its resistance against many antibiotics. This study compares three doses of amikacin on alternate days with a daily dose of meropenem in the same period for the treatment of UTIs with E. coli in a double-blind clinical trial.
methodsThe current double-blind clinical trial compares three doses of amikacin on alternate days with a daily dose of meropenem in the same period for the treatment of UTIs with E. coli. The patients were assigned to two groups: Intervention (receiving a single dose of amikacin once a day at 48-h intervals for a week, three doses) and control (receiving meropenem for 1/TDS for a week).
resultsThe E. coli infection frequency was 61 (21 cases of non-ESBL and 40 cases of ESBL-positive infections) and the frequency of the other infections was 52 (46%). In the patients with ESBL E. coli infection, ciprofloxacin (21; 70%) showed the highest antibiotic resistance, and nitrofurantoin (33; 91.7%) showed the highest sensitivity. The baseline variables between the control and intervention groups indicated no significant difference (p > 0.05). The frequency of signs and symptoms showed no significant difference between the amikacin and meropenem groups in the first 24 h and the first week. In the second week of follow-up, no clinical signs or symptoms were observed in the two groups.
conclusionThe results of this study showed that treatment with amikacin, 1 g q48h, for one week (three doses) has the same result as meropenem, 1 g q8h, for one week (21 doses). The results are the same for the treatment of UTIs with ESBL positive and ESBL negative. Amikacin can be used once every 48 h to treat UTIs, is less expensive and can be administered on an outpatient basis.
trial registrationThis study was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) with ID number: IRCT20170417033483N2 on the date 2018-02-13.
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.