ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Comparative effectiveness of ertapenem versus other empirical antibiotics in elderly patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection: a real-world inverse probability of treatment weighting study.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Elderly adults with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) represent a functionally immunocompromised population due to immunosenescence, multimorbidity, and frailty. Optimizing empirical antibiotic therapy in this group is essential to improve outcomes while minimizing unnecessary broad-spectrum antimicrobial exposure and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) selection pressure. Ertapenem is a once-daily carbapenem with favorable pharmacological properties, yet contemporary real-world comparative data in older adults are limited. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, real-world comparative-effectiveness study of hospitalized adults aged ≥65 years with cIAI at a tertiary academic medical center from 2019 to 2025. Eligible patients received empirical monotherapy with ertapenem, meropenem, cefoperazone-sulbactam, or moxifloxacin for ≥72 hours. A multinomial propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used to balance baseline covariates across the four regimens. The primary outcome was clinical cure or improvement. Secondary outcomes included all-cause in-hospital mortality, infection-related mortality, intra-abdominal infection-related mortality, duration of antibiotic treatment, and length of hospitalization. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted by age group (65-70, 71-80, ≥81 years) and infection source (gastrointestinal Results: A total of 609 patients met eligibility criteria: 129 received ertapenem, 135 meropenem, 125 cefoperazone-sulbactam, and 220 moxifloxacin. IPTW achieved excellent covariate balance, with all standardized mean differences <0.10. In IPTW-adjusted analyses, clinical cure or improvement did not differ significantly between ertapenem and comparator regimens, with adjusted risk differences ranging from 1.80% to 6.44% (all 95% confidence intervals including zero). Mortality outcomes were likewise comparable across groups. Subgroup analyses suggested that ertapenem was associated with higher cure rates and lower mortality in patients aged 65-70 years and those with non-gastrointestinal infection sources, although confidence intervals were wide, and these findings should be interpreted as exploratory. Differences in secondary outcomes varied across regimens. Conclusion: In this IPTW-adjusted real-world analysis of elderly adults with cIAI, ertapenem demonstrated clinical effectiveness comparable to meropenem, cefoperazone-sulbactam, and moxifloxacin. Given its once-daily dosing convenience and narrower ecological impact, ertapenem may represent a reasonable and stewardship-aligned empirical option for selected older patients. Prospective and multicenter studies incorporating microbiological and illness severity data are needed to validate 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.