ArticleInfection and drug resistance2024
Ceftazidime-Avibactam Combination Therapy versus Monotherapy for the Treatment Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Since the introduction of ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA) in the Chinese market, accumulating clinical evidence has substantiated its efficacy in the treatment of infections caused by carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria (CR-GNB). Nevertheless, an ongoing debate persists concerning the choice between monotherapy and combination therapy when devising clinical anti-infection protocols. Patients and Methods: This retrospective, single-center observational study enrolled patients with CR-GNB infections who received CZA treatment between December 2019 and August 2023. The primary outcome assessed was 30-day mortality, and the secondary outcome measured was 14-day bacterial clearance. A multivariate Cox regression model was used to identify variables that were independently associated with 30-day mortality rate. Results: Eighty-three patients were enrolled in the study; of which, 45 received CZA monotherapy, whereas 38 received combination therapy. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 31.3%, and no significant difference was observed in the 30-day mortality rates between the CZA combination therapy and monotherapy groups (31.6% vs 31.1%, p=0.963). After adjustment by propensity score matching, the 30-day mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups (28.6% vs 31.4%, p=0.794). Multivariate COX analysis revealed that age and SOFA score were independent predictors of 30-day mortality. Conclusion: Combination therapy with CZA and other antimicrobials was not found to have an advantage over monotherapy in reducing the 30-day mortality rate.
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.