ArticleInfection2026
Continuous infusion OPAT via elastomeric pumps: effectiveness, safety, and cost-saving potential in a real-world Italian cohort.
Article in Infection, 2026. 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.
- Physicochemical Stability of Aztreonam/Avibactam in Elastomeric Devices for Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate clinical outcomes, safety, patient-reported satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness of elastomeric pump-based Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy (OPAT) over six years at an Italian tertiary center.
methodsThis retrospective single-center study included 76 adult patients treated with continuous-infusion OPAT via elastomeric pumps between 2019 and 2024 at the University Hospital of Trieste, Italy.
resultsA total of 1,934 elastomeric pump-based OPAT days were delivered (median duration of 22.9 days). Clinical cure was achieved in 85.5% of patients; recurrence and failure occurred in 6.2% and 7.9%, respectively. Most frequent indications were skin/soft tissue and surgical site infections (25.9%), complicated urinary tract infections (22.4%), and bone/joint infections (16.4%). Pathogens were mainly Gram-negative (70.7%), including Enterobacterales (40.2%, 57.6% ESBL-producing), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (26.8%), and Staphylococcus aureus (17.1%, 28.6% methicillin-resistant S. aureus). The most used antibiotics were piperacillin/tazobactam (51.3%), cefepime (12.5%) and ceftolozane/tazobactam (7.5%). Adverse events were observed in 13.75% of treatments, primarily vascular access-related (5.7 events/1,000 OPAT-days); drug-related adverse events occurred in 7.8% of patients (3.1 events/1,000 OPAT-days). Among contacted patients (75% response rate), 83.7% expressed willingness to reuse the pump. Total OPAT costs were €62,190.64 compared to an estimated €773,600.00 for inpatient care, yielding a 92% cost reduction (€711,409 saved).
conclusionElastomeric pump-based OPAT is a clinically effective, well-tolerated, and economically advantageous option for selected infections. Its integration into stewardship programs supports broader implementation within modern, sustainable infectious disease care models.
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.