SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2025
Systemic antibiotics for chronic suppurative otitis media.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Topical antibiotics with steroids for chronic suppurative otitis media.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Topical antiseptics for chronic suppurative otitis media.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Antibiotics versus topical antiseptics for chronic suppurative otitis media.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Systemic antibiotics for chronic suppurative otitis media.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Aural toilet (ear cleaning) for chronic suppurative otitis media.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Topical versus systemic antibiotics for chronic suppurative otitis media.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The protective effect of Schisandrin C against methicillin-resistantAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026Article
- Cephalexin-loaded polyvinyl alcohol/graphene oxide thin films as antibacterial wound dressing.RSC advances · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and often polymicrobial infection of the middle ear and mastoid cavity, characterised by ear discharge (otorrhoea) through a perforated tympanic membrane. The predominant symptoms of CSOM are ear discharge and hearing loss. Systemic antibiotics are commonly used to treat people with CSOM. This is the first update to the review published in 2021, and is one of a suite of seven Cochrane reviews evaluating the effects of non-surgical interventions for CSOM.
objectivesTo assess the effects of systemic antibiotics compared to placebo, no treatment, or another systemic antibiotic in people with chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM). SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose, and Throat Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and two clinical trials registers to 15 June 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing systemic antibiotics (oral, injection) to placebo/no treatment or other systemic antibiotics with at least a one-week follow-up period, involving people with chronic (at least two weeks) ear discharge of unknown cause or due to CSOM. Other treatments were allowed if both treatment and control arms received it. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: resolution of ear discharge or 'dry ear' (whether otoscopically confirmed or not, measured at between one week and up to two weeks, two weeks to up to four weeks, and after four weeks); health-related quality of life using a validated instrument; and ear pain (otalgia)/discomfort/local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications, and ototoxicity measured in several ways. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN
resultsThis update found three new studies (390 participants). Overall, we included 21 studies (2525 participants). We report four core comparisons below, and describe an additional four in the Results section of the review. 1. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo It is very uncertain from a single study if there is a difference between systemic (intravenous) antibiotics and placebo in the resolution of ear discharge between one and two weeks (risk ratio (RR) 8.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.88 to 38.21; 1 study, 33 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report results for resolution of ear discharge after two weeks, or health-related quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain for hearing and serious (intracranial) complications. The study did not report ear pain and suspected ototoxicity. 2. Systemic antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo (both study arms received topical antibiotics) Seven studies assessed this comparison, with five presenting usable data. There may be little or no difference between oral ciprofloxacin and placebo/no treatment (with all participants receiving ciprofloxacin ear drops) in the resolution of ear discharge between one and two weeks (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.17; I AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe evidence available to determine whether systemic antibiotics are effective in achieving resolution of ear discharge in people with CSOM is limited. We are very uncertain if systemic antibiotics, when used alone (with or without aural toileting (ear cleaning)), are more effective than placebo or no treatment. When added to an intervention such as topical antibiotics, there may be little or no difference in resolution of ear discharge (very low-certainty evidence). Data were only available for certain classes of antibiotics; it is very uncertain whether one class of systemic antibiotic is more effective than another. Harmful effects of systemic antibiotics were poorly reported in the included studies.
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.