ArticleCureus2025
Carbapenems: The Final Line of Defense in Typhoid Fever Treatment at Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
introductionTyphoid fever, caused by
objectiveThis study aims to assess the efficacy of carbapenems in treating MDR and XDR typhoid fever and identify alternative therapeutic strategies. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Hayatabad Medical Complex from January to June 2024. A total of 501 patients with confirmed typhoid fever were included. Data on demographics, drug sensitivity, and resistance patterns were extracted from the hospital's Health Management Information System (HMIS) and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25 (Released 2017; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsAmong 501 patients, 299 (59.7%) were male, with a mean age of 23.84 ± 0.24 years. MDR was observed in 106 (36%) patients, while XDR and carbapenem resistance were present in only three (0.6%) cases. Imipenem demonstrated a high sensitivity of 466 (93%), while meropenem had 380 (75.8%) sensitivity with no resistance. Non-carbapenem antibiotics, such as polymyxin 468 (93.4%) sensitivity and colistin 446 (89%) sensitivity, exhibited higher efficacy than carbapenems. Alarmingly, cephalosporins such as cefepime exhibited 454 (91%) resistance. Resistance to carbapenems was rare, affecting only three (0.6%) patients.
conclusionCarbapenems remain highly effective against MDR and XDR typhoid, but non-carbapenem options such as polymyxin and colistin offer viable alternatives in reducing carbapenem dependence. Enhanced antimicrobial stewardship is critical to preserving these last-resort treatments.
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.