SynthesisInfection2026
Linezolid versus clindamycin for toxin inhibition in severe skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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.
- Case Report: Necrotizing myositis secondary to a pararectal fistula: diagnostic challenges and multidisciplinary management.Frontiers in medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNecrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are life-threatening infections often caused by toxin-producing bacteria. Clindamycin has historically been favoured for its toxin-inhibiting properties but increasing resistance and adverse effects have prompted interest in alternatives. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of linezolid versus clindamycin plus anti-gram-positive therapy in patients with severe or necrotizing skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs).
methodsA systematic literature search through December 12, 2024, was conducted across eight databases and clinical trial registries. Studies comparing linezolid-containing regimens to clindamycin plus anti-gram-positive therapy in patients with severe SSTIs were included. Outcomes of interest included ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, mortality, ventilator days, vasopressor days, antimicrobial duration, and adverse effects. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for ICU LOS and hospital LOS.
resultsOf 310 articles screened, four retrospective studies met inclusion criteria. Moderate to significant risk of bias was present. No significant differences were observed in ICU LOS (mean difference [MD]: -0.001 days; 95% CI: -1.110 to 1.107; p = 0.998; I
conclusionsNo significant difference in ICU and hospital length of stay were noted between linezolid and clindamycin-based regimens. Lower rates of AKI were reported with linezolid. However, given the study design and potential risk of bias these results should be interpreted with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41504966What 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.