SynthesisFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Comparative effectiveness and safety of vancomycin versus linezolid for the treatment of central nervous system infections: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial Resistance in Major Gram-Positive Pathogens: Beyond the Vancomycin Border.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- [From cutaneous abscess to ventriculitis caused by Panton-Valentine leukocidin-positive methicillin-resistantRevista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 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
Objectives: This study conducted a meta-analysis comparing vancomycin and linezolid for treating central nervous system (CNS) infections, addressing the lack of comprehensive evaluations in existing research on antibiotic therapy for CNS infections. Methods: We systematically searched databases, including the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Chinese databases, up to April 22, 2025. All eligible randomized controlled trials and cohort studies of vancomycin or linezolid were included. The clinical success rate was the primary outcome of interest. The secondary outcomes of interest were cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) parameters, systemic inflammatory markers and the occurrence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Two reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed the study quality (NOS/ROB 2.0). The meta-analysis employed random/fixed-effects models to calculate pooled dichotomous outcomes (ORs) and continuous outcomes (SMDs) with 95% CIs via RevMan 5.4. Results: This meta-analysis included 17 studies (6 head-to-head). Clinical cure rates were not significantly different between vancomycin (84.7%, 222/262) and linezolid (79.7%, 200/251), with a pooled OR of 1.29 (95% CI: 0.55-2.99; p =0.56), while substantial heterogeneity existed (I Conclusion: Vancomycin and linezolid have similar effectiveness in CNS infection from current available evidences, but vancomycin is associated with a greater risk of ADR. Treatment selection should be based on patients' individual characteristics, such as risk of thrombocytopenia, renal function, and availability of therapeutic drug monitoring.
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.