ReviewCritical care (London, England)2025
Antibiotic therapy in necrotizing soft tissue infections: a narrative review of the greater Paris SURFAST consortium.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Results of surgical treatment of necrotizing soft tissue infections. A 15-years retrospective cohort study of a single center of emergency surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Resistance of ESKAPE Pathogens Identified in Patients with Necrotizing Fasciitis: A 10-Year Retrospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Adjuvant intravenous immunoglobulin in elderly sepsis: a randomized controlled study of mortality, organ function, and inflammation.Frontiers in medicine · 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are uncommon, yet rapidly progressive and potentially fatal conditions. However, evidence-based guidance on antibiotic therapy remains limited. Current recommendations emphasize the need for broad-spectrum empirical coverage, including gram-positive, gram-negative, anaerobes, and Streptococcus pyogenes when clinically indicated. We aimed at developing a practical, evidence-based framework for empirical antibiotic therapy in NSTIs. This narrative review is informed by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, without date restrictions. We propose a structured decision-making algorithm for empirical antibiotic selection in NSTIs, integrating key clinical parameters: infection site, healthcare-associated versus community-acquired origin, risk factors for extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and signs of sepsis or septic shock. Alternative regimens are provided for patients with severe β-lactam allergies. Special considerations for immunocompromised and other vulnerable host populations are also addressed. This review offers clinicians a pragmatic, stepwise approach to antibiotic therapy in NSTIs, while identifying critical knowledge gaps and priorities for future research.
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.