ArticleCureus2025
A Comparison of Piperacillin-Tazobactam With Conventional Antibiotics for Prophylaxis in Lower Extremity Type III Open Fractures.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Antibiotic prophylaxis for open lower extremity fractures: a comparative propensity-scored matched analysis of cefazolin vs. piperacillin-tazobactam.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Prophylactic antibiotics for Gustilo-Anderson type III open fractures are cefazolin plus gentamicin (CG) at many institutions. Adverse effects such as nephrotoxicity make gentamicin a less appealing drug, particularly in trauma patients. The purpose of our study was to compare piperacillin-tazobactam (PT) with conventional antibiotics in preventing surgical site infections (SSIs) in lower extremity type III open fractures. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective analysis of 164 patients with lower extremity type III open fractures at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a large academic level one trauma center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. They were treated with three different antibiotic regimens that comprised the cohort. Patients were separated into three groups: those receiving PT, CG, or cefazolin plus gentamicin plus injected tobramycin (CGT), depending on current protocols or the surgeon's discretion. Primary outcomes are deep (requiring return to OR) and superficial (requiring antibiotics only) SSIs, as well as nonunions, during a postoperative period of 12 months. Results Our retrospective analysis from 2008 to 2019 revealed 164 type III open fractures. Seventy-two fractures were treated with PT, 44 with CG, and 48 with CGT. There was not a statistically significant difference in deep or superficial infections among the three groups (p = 0.41, p = 0.52, respectively). Nonunion rates were also not significantly different. Conclusions The results of this study demonstrate no significant difference in SSIs or nonunion rate between PT, CG, and CGT when used for infection prophylaxis in type III open fractures. We believe prophylaxis with PT may be equivalent to traditional regimens, potentially with fewer adverse effects, particularly in polytraumatized patients.
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.