ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025
Non-beta-lactam agents for definitive treatment of ampicillin-susceptible
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To describe the use of non-beta-lactam agents (NBL) to treat ampicillin-susceptible Methods: A single-center retrospective study at a rural tertiary referral center was conducted to identify ASEB episodes between January 1, 2016, and 31 December, 2021. Patient, microbiological, infection, clinical management characteristics, and outcomes were compared between those who received NBL versus BL agents for definitive therapy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with NBL use. Results: 158 episodes of ASEB in 153 patients were included. 43 episodes (27%) were treated with NBL for definitive therapy. Factors associated with NBL therapy were younger age, history of penicillin allergy, history of cancer, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), polymicrobial bacteremia, lack of metastatic foci, and lack of endocarditis. Combination therapy was used in 23% of those treated with BL therapy versus zero patients receiving NBL therapy. All-cause 30-day and 90-day mortality and 30-day relapse rate were not statistically different. In the regression model, NBL therapy was more likely in those with: younger age (AOR 0.95, Conclusion: NBL was used as definitive treatment in 27% of ASEB with good clinical outcomes. This real-life experience suggests NBL can be successfully used to treat ASEB based on clinical discretion.
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.