ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Comparative study of the inhibitory effects of different antibiotic administration routes on bone healing in a rat tibial infection model.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of intravenous versus oral antibiotic treatments in managing bone infections, particularly osteomyelitis, using a rat tibial infection model. Methods: A tibial bone infection model was established in twelve-week-old Wistar rats via injection of Results: Blood analysis showed significant reductions in white blood cell count and pro-inflammatory cytokines in the intravenous treatment groups, especially with vancomycin. μCT imaging revealed better preservation of bone structure in intravenous treatment groups, while oral treatments resulted in more pronounced structural deterioration. Microbial analysis confirmed a lower bacterial load in the intravenous groups, particularly vancomycin, compared to oral treatments. Histological analysis revealed reduced inflammation, lower fibrosis, and minimal bacterial presence in intravenous groups. Osteoclast activity was notably reduced in the vancomycin and cefazolin groups, indicating better control of bone resorption. Conclusion: Intravenous administration of vancomycin demonstrated superior efficacy in controlling bone infection, reducing inflammation, and preserving bone structure compared to oral treatments. While ciprofloxacin and the ciprofloxacin-rifampin combination showed some efficacy, they were less effective than intravenous vancomycin, likely due to lower bioavailability and insufficient drug penetration in bone tissue.
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.