ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2024
Oral quinolones versus intravenous β-lactam for the treatment of acute focal bacterial nephritis: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence regarding the best antibiotic regimen and the route of administration to treat acute focal bacterial nephritis (AFBN) is scarce. The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of intravenous (IV) β-lactam antibiotics versus oral quinolones.
methodsThis is a retrospective single centre study of patients diagnosed with AFBN between January 2017 and December 2018 in Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona (Spain). Patients were identified from the diagnostic codifications database. Patients treated with oral quinolones were compared with those treated with IV β-lactam antibiotics. Therapeutic failure was defined as death, relapse, or evolution to abscess within the first 30 days.
resultsA total of 264 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of those, 103 patients (39%) received oral ciprofloxacin, and 70 (26.5%) IV β-lactam. The most common isolated microorganism was Escherichia coli (149, 73.8%) followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (26, 12.9%). Mean duration of treatment was 21.3 days (SD 7.9). There were no statistical differences regarding therapeutic failure between oral quinolones and IV β-lactam treatment (6.6% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.6). Out of the 66 patients treated with intravenous antibiotics, 4 (6.1%) experienced an episode of phlebitis and 1 patient (1.5%) an episode of catheter-related bacteraemia.
conclusionsWhen susceptible, treatment of AFBN with oral quinolones is as effective as IV β-lactam treatment with fewer adverse events.
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.