ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Practical utility of meropenem therapeutic drug monitoring: a systematic review of evidence for clinical application.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. 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 and purpose: Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) is advocated to optimize antibiotic therapy, yet its efficacy remains debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates TDM's impact on meropenem therapy, focusing on treatment efficacy, bacterial clearance, and changes in biomarkers (C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, procalcitonin (PCT) levels, white blood cell (WBC) count, neutrophil ratios). Methods: A systematic search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI. Eligible studies comparing TDM with non-TDM approaches for meropenem were identified according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pooled analyses were conducted using fixed-effects or random-effects models, selected based on the degree of heterogeneity among studies. Results: A total of nine studies comprising 834 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The study populations primarily consisted of adult and elderly patients with moderate to severe infections, including respiratory tract, urinary tract, and bloodstream infections. TDM significantly improved treatment efficacy (RR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.10-1.28) and bacterial clearance rates (RR = 1.29; 95% CI: 1.12-1.48). CRP levels decreased significantly (mean difference = 14.91; 95% CI: 2.79-27.02), while changes in PCT, WBC, and neutrophil ratios were non-significant. Adverse reactions showed a non-significant reduction (RR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.38-1.11). Low heterogeneity across studies supports the robustness of these findings. Conclusion: TDM enhances treatment efficacy and bacterial clearance in meropenem therapy, but its impact on adverse reactions and certain biomarkers remains uncertain. Further research is needed to clarify TDM's clinical utility and limitations.
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.