Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39184617›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Continued Intravenous Versus First Week Transition to Oral Antibiotic Therapy in Bloodstream Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Cara Mohammed, Hoi Kei Choi, Sana Altaf, Joshua Sajja, Lynda A Ezike, Jada Wang, Urenna O Ihezue, Juan J Prieto, Syeda Simrah Fatima, Adetola G Mowo-Wale

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Gram-negative bloodstream infections: where can we do better? A retrospective cohort study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025
    Observational
  4. Article
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.

Cara MohammedOrthopaedic Surgery, Sangre Grande Hospital, Sangre Grande, TTO.
Hoi Kei ChoiNeuroscience, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Sana AltafInternal Medicine, Deccan College of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, IND.
Joshua SajjaGeneral Medicine, Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, IND.
Lynda A EzikeInternal Medicine, Kursk State Medical University, Kursk, RUS.
Jada WangInternal Medicine, St. George's University, Brooklyn, USA.
Urenna O IhezuePublic Health, College of Medicine, Imo State University, Owerri, NGA.
Juan J PrietoGeneral Medicine, Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara, Zapopan, MEX.
Syeda Simrah FatimaInternal Medicine, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore, IND.
Adetola G Mowo-WaleInternal Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Sagamu, NGA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are a major public health concern worldwide, requiring prompt and effective antibiotic therapy. Traditionally, intravenous (IV) antibiotics have been preferred for their rapid action and consistent absorption. However, interest is growing in transitioning to oral (PO) antibiotics when suitable, due to similar pharmacokinetics, improved patient outcomes, and reduced healthcare costs. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of switching from IV to PO antibiotics for both gram-negative and gram-positive BSIs. Scopus, Embase, and PubMed databases were comprehensively searched until March 2023. The review included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing continued IV therapy with early transition from IV to PO antibiotics within the first week of admission. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies involving adult patients (≥18 years) and reporting specific outcomes such as treatment success, mortality, and hospital readmissions. Meta-analysis of 17 studies comprising 11,245 patients demonstrated higher treatment success rates overall (OR: 1.40, P=0.04), particularly in gram-negative infections (OR: 1.42, P=0.05). However, this effect was not statistically significant in the gram-positive subgroup (OR: 1.41, P=0.036). Oral switch significantly reduced all-cause mortality overall (OR: 0.35, P=0.003), especially in gram-negative infections (OR: 0.22, P=0.008), but not significantly in gram-positive infections (OR: 0.60, P=0.09). Both gram-negative and gram-positive infections benefited from shorter hospital stays (P<0.0001), despite significant heterogeneity. Hospital readmission rates did not significantly differ between IV and oral switch groups (P=0.53). Our meta-analysis suggests potential benefits of early transition from IV to PO antibiotics for BSIs, including improved treatment outcomes and shorter hospital stays without an increased risk of readmission. However, these findings are subject to selection bias, and further standardized randomized trials are essential to validate these results.

Indexed as

bloodstream infectionshealthcare economicsintravenous antibioticsmeta-analysismortalityoral antibioticsstep-down therapytreatment success

Identifiers

PMID39184617
PMCPMC11343333

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.