Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38565898›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2024

Assessment of the practical impact of adjusting beta-lactam dosages based on therapeutic drug monitoring in critically ill adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and observational studies.

Eszter Gulyás, István László Horváth, Marie Anne Engh, Stefania Bunduc, Fanni Dembrovszky, Péter Fehérvári, András Bánvölgyi, Dezső Csupor, Péter Hegyi, Gellért Balázs Karvaly

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Challenges and opportunities in the management of severe pneumonia. Key concepts from the Seventh Annual Meeting of Spanish Experts 2025.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Eszter GulyásCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
István László HorváthCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Marie Anne EnghCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Stefania BunducCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Fanni DembrovszkyInstitute for Translational Medicine, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Péter FehérváriCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
András BánvölgyiCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Dezső CsuporCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Péter HegyiCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Gellért Balázs KarvalyCentre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. karvaly.gellert.balazs@semmelweis.hu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An estimated 70% of critically ill patients receive antibiotics, most frequently beta-lactams. The pharmacokinetic properties of these substances in this patient population are poorly predictable. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is helpful in making personalized decisions in this field, but its overall impact as a clinical decision-supporting tool is debated. We aimed to evaluate the clinical implications of adjusting beta-lactam dosages based on TDM in the critically ill population by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of available investigations. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies were retrieved by searching three major databases. The intervention group received TDM-guided beta-lactam treatment, that is, at least one dose reconsideration based on the result of the measurement of drug concentrations, while TDM-unadjusted dosing was employed in the comparison group. The outcomes were evaluated using forest plots with random-effects modeling and subgroup analysis. Eight eligible studies were identified, including 1044 patients in total. TDM-guided beta-lactam treatment was associated with improved clinical cure from infection [odds ratio (OR): 2.22 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.78-2.76)] and microbiological eradication [OR: 1.72 (CI: 1.05-2.80)], as well as a lower probability of treatment failure [OR: 0.47 (CI: 0.36-0.62)], but the heterogeneity of studies was remarkably high, especially in terms of mortality (70%). The risk of bias was moderate. While the TDM-guided administration of beta-lactams to critically ill patients has a favorable impact, standardized study designs and larger sample sizes are required for developing evidence-based protocols in this field.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-LactamsCritical IllnessDrug MonitoringRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdultHumansObservational Studies as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-LactamsBeta-lactamCritically illICUMeta-analysisTherapeutic drug monitoring

Identifiers

PMID38565898
PMCPMC10987621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.