ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Comparative effectiveness of monotherapy vs. combination therapy for postoperative central nervous system infections in neurosurgical patients: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough clinical guidelines recommend vancomycin-based combination therapy for patients with postoperative intracranial infections in neurosurgery, the trend of global bacterial resistance and the management of antimicrobial agents have made monotherapy a common treatment option for some patients. This study aims to compare the efficacy of single-drug therapy (SDT) versus vancomycin combination therapy (VCT) in treating central nervous system infections (CNSIs) following neurosurgery.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted, adjusting for various covariates such as length of stay (LoS), admission status, age, comorbidity status (Charlson Comorbidity Index, CCI), surgical and incision levels, and duration of surgery (DOS) using propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1:2 ratio. The treatment effects of the two empirical treatment regimens were evaluated through PSM and logistic regression for dual robustness.
resultsA total of 539 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 177 cases in SDT and 101 cases in VCT after PSM. The clinical cure rate was 76% in the SDT compared to 90% in the VCT (p = 0.007) after PSM. Of the result of antibiotic susceptibility testing, only 13.9% of cases identified specific pathogens, of which gram-positive cocci were the dominant. VCT was significantly more effective than SDT, both in unadjusted (OR 2.941, 95% CI 1.434-6.607, p = 0.005) and adjusted models (OR 3.605, 95% CI 1.611-8.812, p = 0.003). Gender, race, and surgical complexity were significant factors influencing treatment choice; female patients and those with complex surgeries were less likely to receive SDT. Although SDT was practically effective for treating CNSIs, VCT proved superior for complex infections.
conclusionThe findings of this study suggest that, given concerns about antibiotic resistance and the varying complexities of infections, while SDT is effective in certain cases, VCT remains the preferred choice for complex CNSIs. This research provides important references for clinical practice, highlighting the need to consider multiple factors when selecting treatment options and advancing the understanding of treatment strategies for postoperative central nervous system infections.
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.