ArticleClinical rheumatology2024
Infection prophylaxis among patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) vasculitis: a scoping review.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Severe infections associated with the use of strong immunosuppressive medication are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with ANCA vasculitis (AV). While guidelines conditionally recommend trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) prophylaxis for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in AV patients, robust evidence on prophylaxis strategies is lacking. This scoping review aimed to assess the existing evidence on infection prophylaxis in AV patients, identify knowledge gaps, and guide future study design. A comprehensive search of six databases and relevant references identified original studies in English from January 1, 2000, to July 31, 2020. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies evaluating the impact of any antimicrobial prophylaxis strategy on infection-related outcomes in AV patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment. Studies were screened by four researchers using a blinded approach. Data was extracted by two reviewers, with differences resolved via consensus in consultation with a third reviewer. Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria, including two randomized trials and 17 cohort studies, with TMP-SMX being the most commonly assessed prophylactic strategy. The studies varied in sample sizes, outcomes measured, prophylactic strategies employed, and proportion of patients who received the regimen. Most cohort studies included no or limited control of potential confounding factors. This scoping review suggests significant variation in AV patients' receipt of TMP-SMX and alternative infection prophylaxis approaches. Observational studies using large secondary healthcare databases with rigorous designs are needed to provide high-quality evidence of the real-world effectiveness of antimicrobial prophylactic regimens, to improve clinical decision-making and quality of care for AV patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39058400What 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.