ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
A comparison of empiric therapy with cefazolin versus ceftriaxone for patients with complicated urinary tract infections in a tertiary care veterans affairs medical center.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical efficacy of abdominal moxibustion at the Zhongji (CV3) in combination with Yiqi Tonglin Yangyin decoction and antibiotics for treating elderly female patients with complicated urinary tract infection.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2026Trial
- Analysis of Antibiotic Consumption Trends and Pathogens' Epidemiological Profile Within a Multidisciplinary Clinical Hospital from Romania.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical Impact of Empiric Ceftriaxone for Hospitalized Patients with Community-Onset Healthcare-Associated UTIs.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData are limited regarding use of narrow-spectrum agents for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). We sought to evaluate cefazolin compared with ceftriaxone for the empiric treatment of patients with cUTIs in an inpatient setting.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, single-center, cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with cefazolin or ceftriaxone at a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center between November 1, 2019 and September 30, 2022. The primary outcome was 30-day clinical success, defined as resolution of signs and symptoms of infection without re-initiation of antibiotics during hospitalization or relapse within 30 days after cUTI diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) within 30 days of the end of antibiotic therapy.
resultsWe identified 113 patients with cUTI treated with cefazolin (n = 52) or ceftriaxone (n = 61) meeting study criteria. The study arms had similar demographics, although patients treated with ceftriaxone more frequently had subjective fever on admission or nephrolithiasis while cefazolin-treated patients had more altered mental status as the only UTI symptom reported, urinary catheter, and had a single dose of another antibiotic prior to starting the study medication. Clinical success was achieved in 47/52 (90%) and 53/61 (87%) in the cefazolin and ceftriaxone groups, respectively (P = 0.56). Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences in length of stay and development of CDI.
conclusionsIn this retrospective cohort study of patients with cUTI at a VA medical center, empiric therapy with cefazolin appears to be a safe and effective treatment option.
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.