ReviewCureus2026
Efficacy of Azithromycin in Preventing Pulmonary Exacerbations Among Patients With Bronchiectasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of low dose azithromycin on the fecal microbiome and fecal bile acids in healthy dogs.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2026Article
- Severe Post-Tuberculosis Bronchiectasis With Bullous Lung Disease Complicated by Acute Infective Exacerbation: A Case Report From Uganda.Clinical case reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bronchiectasis is a debilitating chronic respiratory condition characterized by a vicious cycle of infection, inflammation, and airway destruction, leading to frequent pulmonary exacerbations. While long-term macrolide therapy, particularly azithromycin, has been proposed for its antibiotic and anti-inflammatory effects, previous systematic reviews have reported inconsistent findings or failed to include the most recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study aimed to provide a comprehensive, updated meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of long-term azithromycin in reducing pulmonary exacerbations. We systematically searched PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library through December 2025, identifying six RCTs involving 562 patients. The analysis revealed that long-term azithromycin prophylaxis significantly reduced the rate of pulmonary exacerbations compared to placebo, with a pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.63 (95% CI, -0.90 to -0.35; p < 0.00001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated consistent benefits in both adult (SMD -1.03) and pediatric (SMD -1.52) populations (p = 0.10 for subgroup difference), despite moderate heterogeneity (I² = 58%). While treatment did not yield statistically significant improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) predicted (p = 0.08) or St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores (p = 0.81), the incidence of adverse events was comparable to placebo (relative risk (RR) 1.24; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.61; p = 0.11). These findings indicate that azithromycin is a safe and effective intervention for preventing exacerbations in both children and adults and should be considered in the management of patients with frequent respiratory events.
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.