ArticleJournal of neurology2025
Is intravenous aciclovir overused in possible viral encephalitis? a retrospective review.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lumbar puncture use and antibiotic treatment in newly admitted febrile children following index cases of invasive infections.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTimely administration of IV aciclovir reduces mortality in herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis (Sköldenberg in Lancet, 1984), (Whitley in N Engl J Med, 1986). Early diagnosis, however, is challenging due to non-specific symptoms and delays in obtaining key investigation results. Empiric treatment with intravenous (IV) aciclovir in cases of suspected meningitis to cover for possible concurrent viral encephalitis is an approach not supported by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) ( https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng240 , 2024). Such practice exposes patients to the risk of iatrogenic nephrotoxicity and neurotoxicity.
methodsOur objectives were to evaluate the diagnostic approach to suspected viral encephalitis and appropriateness of aciclovir prescription. This was a retrospective cohort study of 410 patients over 16 years old prescribed IV aciclovir for suspected central nervous system infection at Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust between December 2021 and February 2024.
results29% of patients fulfilled diagnostic criteria for possible or probable encephalitis while 5% did not fulfil any of the criteria. 38% had no microbiological or serological testing for HSV or varicella zoster virus. Discharge diagnoses included 5% with viral encephalitis (2% confirmed on cerebrospinal fluid testing) and 6% with meningitis, while the commonest diagnosis was delirium (11% of patients). DISCUSSION: While acknowledging clinical uncertainty and attendant risks of missing a diagnosis of true viral encephalitis, in line with NICE guidelines we suggest a review of routine prescription of IV aciclovir in suspected meningitis and emphasise the importance of altered mental status as a useful distinguishing feature between viral encephalitis and meningitis in immunocompetent patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40522532What 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.