ArticleInfection and drug resistance2024
Ceftazidime-Avibactam for the Treatment of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella Pneumoniae Infection: A Retrospective, Single Center 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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Carbapenem-ResistantMicroorganisms · 2026Review
- Ceftazidime-avibactam for multidrug-resistant gram-negative infections: outcomes and timing of initiation across 22 U.S. medical centers.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026Article
- Carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative pathogens: molecular epidemiology, diagnostic advances, and emerging therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam versus tigecycline in the treatment of pneumonia caused by carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A Comparative Study of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Meropenem-Based Regimens in the Treatment of Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections in Intensive Care Units.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA), a novel beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor, plays an important role in the threat of emerging carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) infection. The study aims to analyze the clinical effectiveness and factors influencing treatment response to CZA for carbapenem-resistant Patients and Methods: From February 2020 to December 2021, patients with CRKP infection treated with CZA were enrolled in this retrospective, single-center cohort study in northern Taiwan. The primary outcome was 28-day survival rate. The secondary outcomes were clinical success, and microbiological cure. Multivariate regression analysis was used to evaluate factors associated with 28-day survival. Results: A total of 142 patients treated with CZA alone (n=82) or in combination therapy (n=60) were included. We found 28-day survival rate, microbiological cure, and clinical success rate were 78% (111/142), 86% (87/101), and 48% (63/132), respectively. In multivariate analysis, there were no significant differences in 28-day survival between monotherapy group and combination therapy group (P=0.424). A relative lower microbiological cure rate can be observed in lower respiratory tract infection from univariate analysis (P=0.07). In addition, significantly better survival was observed in patients with creatinine clearance rate (CCr) ≥50 mL/min than CCr <50 mL/min (P=0.005). Conclusion: CZA is an effective and important treatment option for CRKP infection even when it is treated as monotherapy. In patients with impaired renal function, a potential impact of CZA dose adjustments on poor survival outcomes has been observed, indicating the need for further research to determine optimal renal dose adjustment strategies.
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.