ArticleInfection and drug resistance2025
Effectiveness and Safety of High-Dose versus Standard-Dose Cefoperazone-Sulbactam in Severe Infections: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 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.
- Characterization ofInfection and drug resistance · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of high-dose versus standard-dose cefoperazone-sulbactam in patients with severe infections, particularly those caused by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Patients and Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted across four hospitals from January 2020 to October 2024. Adult patients who received cefoperazone-sulbactam for severe infections, defined as admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), requirement for mechanical ventilation, or an increase in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of more than 2, or MDROs were categorized into high-dose (2 g-2 g q8h) and standard-dose (2 g-2 g q12h) groups. The primary outcome was clinical cure at day 14. Secondary outcomes included microbiological eradication, in-hospital mortality, and adverse events (AEs). Multivariate logistic regression and subgroup analyses were performed to identify treatment-associated factors. Results: A total of 383 patients were included: 141 in the high-dose group and 242 in the standard-dose group. The high-dose group demonstrated significantly higher clinical cure rates (49.7% vs 38.8%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.05-2.50) and microbiological eradication rates (46.1% vs 20.3%; aOR: 3.85, 95% CI: 2.37-6.26). There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (17.7% vs 21.1%, aOR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.41-1.25). Subgroup analyses showed greater benefit of high-dose therapy in patients with pneumonia, acute respiratory failure, ICU admission, and Charlson Comorbidity Index >4. Changes in liver function tests, renal function (serum creatinine), and coagulation parameters over the course of therapy did not differ significantly between the high-dose and standard-dose groups. Conclusion: High-dose cefoperazone-sulbactam showed superior clinical and microbiological efficacy compared to the standard dose without increased safety concerns. These findings support the use of high-dose regimens in critically ill patients or those with MDRO infections.
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.