ArticleTherapeutic advances in infectious disease
Evaluation of outcomes associated with antipseudomonal beta-lactams for treatment of methicillin-susceptible
Article in Therapeutic advances in infectious disease. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Treatment of methicillin-susceptible Objectives: To determine whether differences in outcomes exist between patients with MSSA bacteremia treated with cefazolin/oxacillin (standard of care; SOC) versus APBLs. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: Adult and pediatric patients hospitalized between June 2016 and June 2023 with at least one positive blood culture for MSSA who received at least 14 consecutive days of inpatient therapy with cefazolin, oxacillin, cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, or meropenem were included. Patients who received APBLs were compared to those who received SOC. The primary outcome was composite clinical failure (i.e., 30-day all-cause mortality and/or bacteremia recurrence within 30 days). Secondary outcomes included 60-day all-cause mortality, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, 30-day readmission, time to bacteremia clearance, time to mortality, and adverse events (i.e., Results: One hundred patients were included, with 50 patients in each group. The most common source of bacteremia was catheter-related (28% total), and twice as many patients met criteria for complicated MSSA bacteremia in the SOC versus APBL group (80% vs 40%, Conclusion: No differences in mortality or bacteremia recurrence were identified among patients with MSSA bacteremia treated with APBLs compared to SOC. Larger studies should be performed to confirm these findings.
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.