SynthesisSurgical infections2026
Ertapenem as an Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Colectomies and Laparotomies: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Surgical infections, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionGiven concerns for antibiotic resistance, broader spectrum antibiotic agents such as ertapenem are being used for pre-operative prophylaxis. We hypothesize that pre-operative ertapenem prior to laparotomies and colectomies is superior at decreasing surgical site infections (SSIs) compared with other widely used antibiotic agents.
methodsMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were queried for studies until February 02, 2025. Studies were excluded if they did not evaluate ertapenem as a pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing laparotomy or colectomy, the outcome was not SSIs, or it represented a review of prior publications. Three reviewers independently extracted relevant articles, and two performed risk-of-bias analyses.
resultsOf 6,389 abstracts identified, 9 studies remained after full-text review. Seven of the included studies were observational (78%), and two (22%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The median number of patients enrolled was 499 (inter-quartile range 253, 5192). Study populations included colorectal surgery (n = 8) and trauma patients undergoing laparotomy (n = 1). Ertapenem was compared with single-agent second-generation cephalosporins such as cefotetan, cefuroxime, and cefoxitin and to a single-agent penicillin with or without a combined β-lactamase inhibitor (i.e., ampicillin-sulbactam). In total, five (56%) studies showed that ertapenem was superior in preventing SSIs, decreasing SSI rates by as much as 59% (adjusted odds ratio = 0.41 [0.28-0.61]; p < 0.001).
conclusionApproximately half of the studies (56%) demonstrated that ertapenem was superior to other commonly used antibiotic prophylaxis regimens in decreasing SSI after laparotomies and colectomies. However, most studies were observational. Therefore, RCTs, especially in trauma, are needed.
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.